FOOTNOTES:

However, God produced grief of heart, and exercises of conscience, and that in a most wonderful way. Years rolled on, and these brethren might have vainly imagined that all was right; but, then, "seven years of plenty, and seven years of scarcity!" What did they mean? Who sent them? And for what were they designed? Admirable providence! Unsearchable wisdom! The famine reaches to Canaan, and the calls of hunger actually bring the guilty brethren to the feet of the injured Joseph! How marked is the display of God's own hand in all this! There they stand, with the arrow of conviction thrust through and through their consciences, in the presence of the man whom they had, "with wicked hands," cast into the pit. Surely theirsin had found them out; but it was in the presence of Joseph. Blessed place!

"Then Joseph could not refrain himself before all them that stood by him; and he cried, Cause every man to go out from me. And there stood no man with him, while Joseph made himself known unto his brethren." (Chap. xlv. 1.) No stranger was allowed to witness this sacred scene. What stranger could understand or appreciate it? We are here called to witness, as it were, divinely-wrought conviction in the presence of divine grace; and we may say, when these two come together there is an easy settlement of every question.

"And Joseph said unto his brethren,Come near to me, I pray you. And they came near. And he said, I am Joseph your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt. Now therefore be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that you sold me hither; for God did send me before you, to preserve life.... And God sent me before you, to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance. So now it was not you sent me hither, but God." This is grace indeed, setting the convicted conscience perfectly at rest. The brethren had, already, most thoroughly condemned themselves, and hence Joseph had only to pour in the blessed balm into their broken hearts. This is all sweetly typical of God's dealings with Israel, in the latter day, when they shall look upon him whom they have pierced, and mourn. Then they shall prove the reality of divine grace, and the cleansing efficacy of that "fountain which shall be opened to the house of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness." (Zech. xiii. 1.)

In the third chapter of Acts, we find the Spirit of God in Peter seeking to produce this divine conviction in the consciences of the Jews. "The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. But ye denied the holy One and the just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead, whereof we are witnesses." These statements were designed to elicit from the hearts and lips of the hearers the confession made by Joseph's brethren—"We are verily guilty." Then follows the grace. "And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. But those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Repent ye, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." We here see that, although the Jews really carried out the enmity of their hearts in the death of Christ, as did also Joseph's brethren in their treatment of him, yet, the grace of God to each is seen in this, that all is shown to be decreed and foreshown of God for their blessing. This is perfect grace, surpassing all human thought; and all that is needed in order to the enjoyment thereof, is a conscience truly convicted by the truth of God. Those who could say, "We are verily guilty," could rightly understand the words of precious grace, "It was not you, but God." Thus it must ever be. The soul that has thoroughly pronounced its owncondemnation, is prepared to understand and appreciate God's pardon.

The remaining chapters of this book are taken up with the removal of Jacob and his family into Egypt, and their settlement there; Joseph's actings during the remaining years of famine; Jacob's blessing the twelve patriarchs; his death and burial. We shall not dwell in detail upon these things, though the spiritual mind may find much to feed upon therein.[21]Jacob's groundless fears dissipated by the sight of his son alive, and exalted,—the peculiar grace of God seen in its overruling power, yet evidently mingled with judgment,inasmuch as Jacob's sons have to go down into the very place whither they had sent their brother. Again, Joseph's remarkable grace throughout: though exalted by Pharaoh, he hides himself, as it were, and binds the people in abiding obligation to the king. Pharaoh says, "Go to Joseph," and Joseph, in effect, says, "all you have and all you are belong to Pharaoh." This is sweetly interesting, and leads the soul on to that glorious time when the Son of man shall take the reins of government into his own hand, by divine appointment, and rule over the whole redeemed creation, his Church—the bride of the Lamb—occupying the nearest and most intimate place, according to the eternal counsels. The house of Israel, fully restored, shall be nourishedand sustained by his gracious hand; and all the earth shall know the deep blessedness of being under his sceptre. Finally, having brought every thing into subjection, he shall hand back the reins of government into the hands of God, that "he may be all in all." From all this we may form some idea of the richness and copiousness of Joseph's history. In short, it sets before us distinctly in type the mission of the Son to the house of Israel,—his humiliation and rejection,—the deep exercises and final repentance and restoration of Israel,—the union of the Church with Christ,—his exaltation and universal government, and, finally, it points us forward to the time when "God shall be all in all." It is quite needless to remark, that all these things are largely taught and fully established throughout the entire canon of inspiration: we do not therefore build their truth upon Joseph's history; still it is edifying to find such early foreshadowings of these precious truths: it proves to us the divine unity which pervades holy scripture. Whether we turn to Genesis or to Ephesians,—to the prophets of the Old or those of the New Testament,—we learn the same truths. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God."

FOOTNOTES:[1]It is an interesting fact that the moon, as viewed through a powerful telescope, presents the appearance of one vast ruin of nature.[2]The Hebrew word which is rendered "builded" in the margin, isוַיִּבֵוwhich the LXX. render by ωκοδομεσεν. A reference to the original of Eph. ii. 20, 22 will show the reader that the words rendered "built" and "builded together" are inflections of the same verb.[3]This subject will, if the Lord permit, come before us again in the twentieth chapter of Exodus; but I would, here, observe, that very much of the offence and misunderstanding connected with the important subject of the sabbath, may be justly traced to the inconsiderate and injudicious conduct of some who, in their zeal for what they termed Christian liberty, in reference to the sabbath, rather lose sight of the claims of honest consciences; and also of the place which the Lord's day occupies in the New Testament. Some have been known to enter on their weekly avocations, simply to show their liberty, and thus they caused much needless offence. Such acting could never have been suggested by the Spirit of Christ. If I am ever so clear and free in my own mind, I should respect the consciences of my brethren; and, moreover, I do not believe that those who so carry themselves, really understand the true and precious privileges connected with the Lord's day. We should only be too thankful to be rid of all secular occupation and distraction, to think of having recourse to them for the purpose of showing our liberty. The good providence of our God has so arranged for his people throughout the British Empire that they can, without pecuniary loss, enjoy the rest of the Lord's day, inasmuch as all are obliged to abstain from business. This must be regarded by every well-regulated mind as a mercy; for, if it were not thus ordered, we know how man's covetous heart would, if possible, rob the Christian of the sweet privilege of attending the assembly on the Lord's day. And who can tell what would be the deadening effect of uninterrupted engagement with this world's traffic? Those Christians who, from Monday morning to Saturday night, breathe the dense atmosphere of the mart, the market, and the manufactory, can form some idea of it.It cannot be regarded as a good sign to find men introducing measures for the public profanation of the Lord's day. It assuredly marks the progress of infidelity and French influence.But there are some who teach that the expression ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, which is rightly enough translated, "the Lord's day," refers to "the day of the Lord," and that the exiled apostle found himself carried forward, as it were, into the Spirit of the day of the Lord. I do not believe the original would bear such an interpretation; and, besides, we have in 1 Thess. v. 2, and 2 Peter iii. 10, the exact words, "the day of the Lord," the original of which is quite different from the expression above referred to, being not ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, but ἡ ἡμερα κυριου. This entirely settles the matter, so far as the mere criticism is concerned; and as to interpretation, it is plain that by far the greater portion of the Apocalypse is occupied, not with "the day of the Lord," but with events prior thereto.[4]Compare, also, Ezekiel xlvii. 1-12; and Zech. xiv. 8.[5]My reader will observe the change in the second chapter from the expression "God" to "Lord God." There is much importance in the distinction. When God is seen acting in relation with man, he takes the title "Lord God,"—(Jehovah Elohim;) but until man appears on the scene, the word "Lord" is not used. I shall just point out three out of many passages in which the distinction is very strikingly presented. "And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, asGod(Elohim) had commanded him; and theLord(Jehovah) shut him in." (Gen. vii. 16.) Elohim was going to destroy the world which he had made; but Jehovah took care of the man with whom he stood in relation. Again, "that all the earth may know that there is a God (Elohim) in Israel. And all this assembly shall know that the Lord (Jehovah) saveth," &c. (1 Sam. xvii. 46, 47.) All the earth was to recognise the presence of Elohim; but Israel was called to recognise the actings of Jehovah, with whom they stood in relation. Lastly, "Jehoshaphat cried out, andthe Lord(Jehovah) helped him; andGod(Elohim) movedthemto depart from him." (2 Chron. xviii. 31.) Jehovah took care of his poor erring servant; but Elohim, though unknown, acted upon the hearts of the uncircumcised Syrians.[6]There is a profoundly interesting thought suggested by comparing the word Θειτης (Rom. i. 20) with the word Θεοτης (Col. ii. 9.) They are both rendered "Godhead;" but they present a very different thought. The heathen might have seen that there was something superhuman, something divine, in creation; but pure, essential, incomprehensible Deity dwelt in the Adorable Person of the Son.[7]Man not only accuses God of being the author of his fall, but also blames him for his non-recovery. How often do we hear persons say that they cannot believe unless God give them the power to believe; and, further, that unless they are the subjects of God's eternal decree, they cannot be saved.Now, it is perfectly true, that no man can believe the gospel, except by the power of the Holy Ghost; and it is also true, that all who so believe the gospel are the happy subjects of God's eternal counsels. But does all this set aside man's responsibility to believe a plain testimony set before him in God's Word? It most certainly does no such thing. But it does reveal the sad evil of man's heart, which leads him to rejectGod's testimonywhich is plainly revealed, and to give as a reason for so doingGod's decree, which is a profound secret, known only to himself. However, it will not avail, for we read in 1 Thess. i. 8, 9, that those "who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, shall be punished with everlasting destruction."Men are responsible to believe the gospel, and they will be punished for not believing it. They are not responsible to know any thing about God's counsels, inasmuch as they are not revealed, and, therefore, there can be no guilt attached to ignorance concerning them. The apostle could say to the Thessalonians, "knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God." How did he know it? Was it by having access to the page of God's secret and eternal decrees? By no means. How then? "Because (ὁτι) our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power." (1 Thess. i. 4, 5.) This is the way to know the election of any. When the gospel comes in power, it is a plain proof of God's election.But, I doubt not, the people who draw a plea from the divine counsels for rejecting the divine testimony, only want some flimsy excuse to continue in sin. They really do not want God; and it would be far more honest in them to say so, plainly, than to put forward a plea which is not merely flimsy, but positively blasphemous. Such a plea will not avail them much amid the terrors of the day of judgment, now fast approaching.[8]The word used by Cain isמִנְּשֹׂאwhich occurs in Psalm xxxii. 1, "whose transgression isforgiven." The LXX. renders it by αφεθηναι, "to be remitted."[9]True, the Lord is using all those things for the furtherance of his own gracious ends; and the Lord's servant can freely use them also; but this does not hinder our seeing the spirit which originates and characterizes them.[10]It is very evident that Enoch knew nothing whatever about the mode of "making the best of both worlds." To him there was but one world. Thus it should be with us.[11]We should ever bear in mind, that "the wisdom which is from above isfirst pure, then peaceable." (James iii. 17.) The wisdom which is from beneath would put "peaceable" first, and, therefore, it can never be pure.[12]"It is impossible to over-estimate the wisdom of the Holy Ghost, as seen in the way in which he treats the ordinance of baptism, in the above remarkable passage." We know the evil use which has been made of baptism; we know the false place it has gotten in the thoughts of many; we know how that the efficacy, which belongs only to the blood of Christ, has been attributed to the water of baptism; we know how the regenerating grace of the Holy Ghost has been transferred to water baptism; and, with the knowledge of all this, we cannot but be struck with the way in which the Spirit of God guards the subject, by stating, that it is not the mere washing away of the filth of the flesh, as by water, "but the answer of a good conscience toward God," which "answer" we get, not by baptism, how important soever it may be, as an ordinance of the kingdom, but "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," "who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification."Baptism, I need hardly say, as an ordinance of divine institution, and in its divinely-appointed place, is most important and deeply significant; but when we find men, in one way or another, putting the figure in place of the substance, we are bound to expose the work of Satan by the light of the word of God.[13]I would here mention, for my reader's prayerful consideration, a thought very familiar to the minds of those who have specially given themselves to the study of what is called "dispensational truth." It has reference to Enoch and Noah. The former was taken away, as we have seen, before the judgment came; whereas the latter was carried through the judgment. Now, it is thought that Enoch is a figure of the Church, who shall be taken away before human evil reaches its climax, and before the divine judgment falls thereon. Noah, on the other hand, is a figure of the remnant of Israel, who shall be brought through the deep waters of affliction, and through the fire of judgment, and led into the full enjoyment of millennial bliss, in virtue of God's everlasting covenant. I may add, that I quite receive this thought in reference to those two Old-Testament fathers. I consider that it has the full support of the general scope and analogy of Holy Scripture.[14]It is interesting to look at this entire subject of the ark and deluge, in connection with that most important and deeply significant ordinance of baptism. A truly baptized person, that is, one who, as the apostle says, "obeys from the heart that type of doctrine to which he is delivered," is one, who has passed from the old world into the new, in spirit and principle, and by faith. The water rolls over his person, signifying that his old man is buried, that his place in nature is ignored, that his old nature is entirely set aside; in short, that he is a dead man. When he is plunged beneath the water, expression is given to the fact that his name, place, and existence, in nature, are put out of sight; that the flesh, with all that pertained thereto, its sins, its iniquities, its liabilities, is buried in the grave of Christ, and never can come into God's sight again.Again, when he rises up out of the water, expression is given to the truth, that he only comes up as the possessor of a new life, even the resurrection life of Christ. If Christ had not been raised from the dead, the believer could not come up out of the water, but should remain buried beneath its surface, as the simple expression of the place which righteously belongs to nature. But, inasmuch as Christ rose from the dead, in the power of a new life, having entirely put away our sins, we also come up out of the water; and, in so doing, set forth the fact, that we are put, by the grace of God, and through the death of Christ, in full possession of a new life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. "We are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (See Rom. vi. and Col. ii.passim. Comp. also 1 Peter iii. 18-22.) All this makes the institution of baptism one of immense importance, and pregnant with meaning.[15]I would here offer a remark as to the word "perfect." When Abraham was called upon to be "perfect," it did not mean perfect to himself; for this he never was, and never could be. It simply meant that he should be perfect as regards the object before his heart,—that his hopes and expectations were to be perfectly and undividedly centred in the "Almighty God."In looking through the New Testament, we find the word "perfect" used in at least four distinct senses. In Matt. v. 48, we read, "Be ye thereforeperfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Here we learn from the context that the word "perfect" refers to the principle of our walk. At verse 44, we read, "love your enemies, ... that ye may be the sons of your Father which is in heaven; for he maketh the sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth rain upon the just and the unjust." Hence to be "perfect" in the sense of Matt. v. 48 is to act on a principle of grace toward all, even toward those who are injurious and hostile. A Christian going to law, and asserting or contending for his rights, is not "perfect as his Father;" for his Father is dealing ingrace, whereas he is dealing inrighteousness.The question here is not as to the right or wrong of going to law with worldly people (as to brethren, 1 Cor. vi. is conclusive). All I contend for is, that a Christian so doing is acting in a character the direct opposite to that of his Father; for assuredly he is not going to law with the world. He is not now on a judgment-seat, but on a mercy-seat—a throne of grace. He showers his blessings upon those who, were he to go to law with them, should be in hell. Wherefore it is plain that a Christian, when he brings a man before the judgment-seat, is not "perfect as his Father which is in heaven is perfect."At the close of Matt. xviii. we have a parable which teaches us that a man who asserts his rights is ignorant of the true character and proper effect of grace. The servant was notunrighteousin demanding what was due to him; but he wasungracious. He was totally unlike his master. He had been forgiven ten thousand talents, and yet he could seize his fellow by the throat for a paltry hundred pence. What was the consequence? He was delivered to the tormentors. He lost the happy sense ofgrace, and was left to reap the bitter fruits of having asserted hisrights, while being himself a subject ofgrace. And, observe further, he was called "awickedservant," not because of having owed "ten thousand talents," but because of not having forgiven the "hundred pence."The masterhad ample grace to settle the former, buthehad not grace to settle the latter. This parable has a solemn voice for all Christians going to law; for although in the application of it, it is said, "so shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you from your heart, forgive not every onehis brothertheir trespasses," yet is the principle of general application, that a man acting in righteousness will losethe senseof grace.In Hebrews ix. we have another sense of the term "perfect." Here, too, the context settles the import of the word. It is "perfect, as pertaining to the conscience." This is a deeply important use of the term. The worshipper under the law never could have a perfect conscience, for the simplest reason possible, because he never had a perfect sacrifice. The blood of a bullock and a goat did well enoughfor a time, but it could not doforever, and therefore could not give a perfect conscience. Now, however, the weakest believer in Jesus is privileged to have a perfect conscience. Why? Is it because he is abetter manthan the worshipper under the law? Nay; but because he has gotten abetter sacrifice. If Christ's sacrifice is perfect forever, the believer's conscience is perfect forever. The two things necessarily go together. For the Christian not to have a perfect conscience is a dishonor to the sacrifice of Christ. It is tantamount to saying that his sacrifice is only temporary, and not eternal in its effect; and what is this but to bring it down to the level of the sacrifices under the Mosaic economy.It is very needful to distinguish between perfection in the flesh and perfection as to conscience. To pretend to the former, is to exaltself; to refuse the latter, is to dishonor Christ. The babe in Christ should have a perfect conscience; whereas St. Paul had not, nor could have, perfect flesh. The flesh is not presented in the word as a thing which is to be perfected, but as a thing which has been crucified. This makes a wide difference. The Christian has sin in him, but notonhim. Why? Because Christ who had no sininhim, ever, had sin on him when he was nailed to the cross.Finally, in Phil. iii. we have two other senses of the word "perfect." The apostle says, "not as though I had already attained, either were alreadyperfect;" and yet a little farther on he says, "Let as many as beperfectbe thus minded." The former refers to the apostle's full and everlasting conformity to Christ in glory. The latter refers to our having Christ as the all-engrossing object before the heart's affections.[16]It would furnish a very searching question for the heart, in reference to every undertaking, were we to ask, "Am I doing this by faith?" "Whatever is not of faith is sin;" and, "Without faith it is impossible to please God."[17]We should ever remember, in a place of trial, that what we want is not a change of circumstances, but victory over self.[18]It is deeply interesting to the spiritual mind to mark how sedulously the Spirit of God, in Rom. ix. and indeed throughout all scripture, guards against the horrid inference which the human mind draws from the doctrine of God's election. When he speaks of "vessels of wrath," he simply says, "fitted to destruction." He does not say that God "fitted" them.Whereas, on the other hand, when he refers to "the vessels of mercy" he says, "whomhehad afore prepared unto glory." This is most marked.If my reader will turn for a moment to Matt. xxv. 34-41, he will find another striking and beautiful instance of the same thing.When the king addresses those on his right hand, he says, "Come, yeblessed of my Father, inherit the kingdomprepared for youfrom the foundation of the world." (Verse 34.)But when he addresses those on his left, he says, "Depart from me, ye cursed." He does not say, "cursed of my Father." And, further, he says, "into everlasting fire, prepared," not foryou, but "for the devil and his angels." (Verse 41.)In a word, then, it is plain that God has "prepared" a kingdom of glory, and "vessels of mercy" to inherit that kingdom; but he has not prepared "everlasting fire" for men, but for the "devil and his angels;" nor has he fitted the "vessels of wrath," but they have fitted themselves.The word of God as clearly establishes "election" as it sedulously guards against "reprobation." Every one who finds himself in heaven will have to thank God for it; and every one that finds himself in hell will have to thank himself.[19]No doubt, when faith allows God to act, he will use his own agency; but this is a totally different thing from his owning and blessing the plans and arrangements of unbelief and impatience. This distinction is not sufficiently understood.[20]Joseph's wife sets forth the Church as united to Christ in his glory; Moses' wife presents the Church as united to Christ in his rejection.[21]The close of Jacob's career stands in most pleasing contrast with all the previous scenes of his eventful history. It reminds one of a serene evening, after a tempestuous day: the sun, which during the day had been hidden from view by clouds, mists, and fogs, sets in majesty and brightness, gilding with his beams the western sky, and holding out the cheering prospect of a bright to-morrow. Thus is it with our aged patriarch. The supplanting, the bargain-making, the cunning, the management, the shifting, the shuffling, the unbelieving selfish fears,—all those dark clouds of nature and of earth seem to have passed away, and he comes forth in all the calm elevation of faith, to bestow blessings, and impart dignities, in that holy skilfulness, which communion with God can alone impart.Though nature's eyes are dim, faith's vision is sharp. He is not to be deceived as to the relative positions assigned to Ephraim and Manasseh in the counsels of God. He has not, like his father Isaac, in Chapter xxvii., to "tremble very exceedingly," in view of an almost fatal mistake. Quite the reverse. His intelligent reply to his less instructed son is, "I know it, my son, I know it." The power of sense has not, as in Isaac's case, dimmed his spiritual vision. He has been taught in the school of experience the importance of keeping close to the divine purpose, and nature's influence cannot move him from thence.In Chapter xlviii. 11, we have a very beautiful example of the mode in which our God ever rises above all our thoughts, and proves himself better than all our fears. "And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face; and, lo, God hath showed me also thy seed." To nature's view, Joseph was dead; whereas in God's view he was alive, and seated in the highest place of authority, next the throne. "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." (1 Cor. ii. 9.) Would that our souls could rise higher in their apprehension of God and his ways.It is interesting to notice the way in which the titles "Jacob" and "Israel" are introduced in the close of the Book of Genesis; as, for example, "One toldJacob, and said, Behold thy son Joseph cometh unto thee: andIsraelstrengthened himself, and sat upon the bed." Then, it is immediately added, "AndJacobsaid unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz." Now, we know, there is nothing in scripture without its specific meaning, and hence this interchange of names contains some instruction. In general, it may be remarked, that "Jacob" sets forth the depth to which God had descended; "Israel," the height to which Jacob was raised.Transcribers notes:Maintained original spelling and punctuation.

[1]It is an interesting fact that the moon, as viewed through a powerful telescope, presents the appearance of one vast ruin of nature.

[2]The Hebrew word which is rendered "builded" in the margin, isוַיִּבֵוwhich the LXX. render by ωκοδομεσεν. A reference to the original of Eph. ii. 20, 22 will show the reader that the words rendered "built" and "builded together" are inflections of the same verb.

[3]This subject will, if the Lord permit, come before us again in the twentieth chapter of Exodus; but I would, here, observe, that very much of the offence and misunderstanding connected with the important subject of the sabbath, may be justly traced to the inconsiderate and injudicious conduct of some who, in their zeal for what they termed Christian liberty, in reference to the sabbath, rather lose sight of the claims of honest consciences; and also of the place which the Lord's day occupies in the New Testament. Some have been known to enter on their weekly avocations, simply to show their liberty, and thus they caused much needless offence. Such acting could never have been suggested by the Spirit of Christ. If I am ever so clear and free in my own mind, I should respect the consciences of my brethren; and, moreover, I do not believe that those who so carry themselves, really understand the true and precious privileges connected with the Lord's day. We should only be too thankful to be rid of all secular occupation and distraction, to think of having recourse to them for the purpose of showing our liberty. The good providence of our God has so arranged for his people throughout the British Empire that they can, without pecuniary loss, enjoy the rest of the Lord's day, inasmuch as all are obliged to abstain from business. This must be regarded by every well-regulated mind as a mercy; for, if it were not thus ordered, we know how man's covetous heart would, if possible, rob the Christian of the sweet privilege of attending the assembly on the Lord's day. And who can tell what would be the deadening effect of uninterrupted engagement with this world's traffic? Those Christians who, from Monday morning to Saturday night, breathe the dense atmosphere of the mart, the market, and the manufactory, can form some idea of it.It cannot be regarded as a good sign to find men introducing measures for the public profanation of the Lord's day. It assuredly marks the progress of infidelity and French influence.But there are some who teach that the expression ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, which is rightly enough translated, "the Lord's day," refers to "the day of the Lord," and that the exiled apostle found himself carried forward, as it were, into the Spirit of the day of the Lord. I do not believe the original would bear such an interpretation; and, besides, we have in 1 Thess. v. 2, and 2 Peter iii. 10, the exact words, "the day of the Lord," the original of which is quite different from the expression above referred to, being not ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, but ἡ ἡμερα κυριου. This entirely settles the matter, so far as the mere criticism is concerned; and as to interpretation, it is plain that by far the greater portion of the Apocalypse is occupied, not with "the day of the Lord," but with events prior thereto.

It cannot be regarded as a good sign to find men introducing measures for the public profanation of the Lord's day. It assuredly marks the progress of infidelity and French influence.

But there are some who teach that the expression ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, which is rightly enough translated, "the Lord's day," refers to "the day of the Lord," and that the exiled apostle found himself carried forward, as it were, into the Spirit of the day of the Lord. I do not believe the original would bear such an interpretation; and, besides, we have in 1 Thess. v. 2, and 2 Peter iii. 10, the exact words, "the day of the Lord," the original of which is quite different from the expression above referred to, being not ἡ κυριακη ἡμερα, but ἡ ἡμερα κυριου. This entirely settles the matter, so far as the mere criticism is concerned; and as to interpretation, it is plain that by far the greater portion of the Apocalypse is occupied, not with "the day of the Lord," but with events prior thereto.

[4]Compare, also, Ezekiel xlvii. 1-12; and Zech. xiv. 8.

[5]My reader will observe the change in the second chapter from the expression "God" to "Lord God." There is much importance in the distinction. When God is seen acting in relation with man, he takes the title "Lord God,"—(Jehovah Elohim;) but until man appears on the scene, the word "Lord" is not used. I shall just point out three out of many passages in which the distinction is very strikingly presented. "And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, asGod(Elohim) had commanded him; and theLord(Jehovah) shut him in." (Gen. vii. 16.) Elohim was going to destroy the world which he had made; but Jehovah took care of the man with whom he stood in relation. Again, "that all the earth may know that there is a God (Elohim) in Israel. And all this assembly shall know that the Lord (Jehovah) saveth," &c. (1 Sam. xvii. 46, 47.) All the earth was to recognise the presence of Elohim; but Israel was called to recognise the actings of Jehovah, with whom they stood in relation. Lastly, "Jehoshaphat cried out, andthe Lord(Jehovah) helped him; andGod(Elohim) movedthemto depart from him." (2 Chron. xviii. 31.) Jehovah took care of his poor erring servant; but Elohim, though unknown, acted upon the hearts of the uncircumcised Syrians.

[6]There is a profoundly interesting thought suggested by comparing the word Θειτης (Rom. i. 20) with the word Θεοτης (Col. ii. 9.) They are both rendered "Godhead;" but they present a very different thought. The heathen might have seen that there was something superhuman, something divine, in creation; but pure, essential, incomprehensible Deity dwelt in the Adorable Person of the Son.

[7]Man not only accuses God of being the author of his fall, but also blames him for his non-recovery. How often do we hear persons say that they cannot believe unless God give them the power to believe; and, further, that unless they are the subjects of God's eternal decree, they cannot be saved.Now, it is perfectly true, that no man can believe the gospel, except by the power of the Holy Ghost; and it is also true, that all who so believe the gospel are the happy subjects of God's eternal counsels. But does all this set aside man's responsibility to believe a plain testimony set before him in God's Word? It most certainly does no such thing. But it does reveal the sad evil of man's heart, which leads him to rejectGod's testimonywhich is plainly revealed, and to give as a reason for so doingGod's decree, which is a profound secret, known only to himself. However, it will not avail, for we read in 1 Thess. i. 8, 9, that those "who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, shall be punished with everlasting destruction."Men are responsible to believe the gospel, and they will be punished for not believing it. They are not responsible to know any thing about God's counsels, inasmuch as they are not revealed, and, therefore, there can be no guilt attached to ignorance concerning them. The apostle could say to the Thessalonians, "knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God." How did he know it? Was it by having access to the page of God's secret and eternal decrees? By no means. How then? "Because (ὁτι) our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power." (1 Thess. i. 4, 5.) This is the way to know the election of any. When the gospel comes in power, it is a plain proof of God's election.But, I doubt not, the people who draw a plea from the divine counsels for rejecting the divine testimony, only want some flimsy excuse to continue in sin. They really do not want God; and it would be far more honest in them to say so, plainly, than to put forward a plea which is not merely flimsy, but positively blasphemous. Such a plea will not avail them much amid the terrors of the day of judgment, now fast approaching.

Now, it is perfectly true, that no man can believe the gospel, except by the power of the Holy Ghost; and it is also true, that all who so believe the gospel are the happy subjects of God's eternal counsels. But does all this set aside man's responsibility to believe a plain testimony set before him in God's Word? It most certainly does no such thing. But it does reveal the sad evil of man's heart, which leads him to rejectGod's testimonywhich is plainly revealed, and to give as a reason for so doingGod's decree, which is a profound secret, known only to himself. However, it will not avail, for we read in 1 Thess. i. 8, 9, that those "who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, shall be punished with everlasting destruction."

Men are responsible to believe the gospel, and they will be punished for not believing it. They are not responsible to know any thing about God's counsels, inasmuch as they are not revealed, and, therefore, there can be no guilt attached to ignorance concerning them. The apostle could say to the Thessalonians, "knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God." How did he know it? Was it by having access to the page of God's secret and eternal decrees? By no means. How then? "Because (ὁτι) our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power." (1 Thess. i. 4, 5.) This is the way to know the election of any. When the gospel comes in power, it is a plain proof of God's election.

But, I doubt not, the people who draw a plea from the divine counsels for rejecting the divine testimony, only want some flimsy excuse to continue in sin. They really do not want God; and it would be far more honest in them to say so, plainly, than to put forward a plea which is not merely flimsy, but positively blasphemous. Such a plea will not avail them much amid the terrors of the day of judgment, now fast approaching.

[8]The word used by Cain isמִנְּשֹׂאwhich occurs in Psalm xxxii. 1, "whose transgression isforgiven." The LXX. renders it by αφεθηναι, "to be remitted."

[9]True, the Lord is using all those things for the furtherance of his own gracious ends; and the Lord's servant can freely use them also; but this does not hinder our seeing the spirit which originates and characterizes them.

[10]It is very evident that Enoch knew nothing whatever about the mode of "making the best of both worlds." To him there was but one world. Thus it should be with us.

[11]We should ever bear in mind, that "the wisdom which is from above isfirst pure, then peaceable." (James iii. 17.) The wisdom which is from beneath would put "peaceable" first, and, therefore, it can never be pure.

[12]"It is impossible to over-estimate the wisdom of the Holy Ghost, as seen in the way in which he treats the ordinance of baptism, in the above remarkable passage." We know the evil use which has been made of baptism; we know the false place it has gotten in the thoughts of many; we know how that the efficacy, which belongs only to the blood of Christ, has been attributed to the water of baptism; we know how the regenerating grace of the Holy Ghost has been transferred to water baptism; and, with the knowledge of all this, we cannot but be struck with the way in which the Spirit of God guards the subject, by stating, that it is not the mere washing away of the filth of the flesh, as by water, "but the answer of a good conscience toward God," which "answer" we get, not by baptism, how important soever it may be, as an ordinance of the kingdom, but "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," "who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification."Baptism, I need hardly say, as an ordinance of divine institution, and in its divinely-appointed place, is most important and deeply significant; but when we find men, in one way or another, putting the figure in place of the substance, we are bound to expose the work of Satan by the light of the word of God.

Baptism, I need hardly say, as an ordinance of divine institution, and in its divinely-appointed place, is most important and deeply significant; but when we find men, in one way or another, putting the figure in place of the substance, we are bound to expose the work of Satan by the light of the word of God.

[13]I would here mention, for my reader's prayerful consideration, a thought very familiar to the minds of those who have specially given themselves to the study of what is called "dispensational truth." It has reference to Enoch and Noah. The former was taken away, as we have seen, before the judgment came; whereas the latter was carried through the judgment. Now, it is thought that Enoch is a figure of the Church, who shall be taken away before human evil reaches its climax, and before the divine judgment falls thereon. Noah, on the other hand, is a figure of the remnant of Israel, who shall be brought through the deep waters of affliction, and through the fire of judgment, and led into the full enjoyment of millennial bliss, in virtue of God's everlasting covenant. I may add, that I quite receive this thought in reference to those two Old-Testament fathers. I consider that it has the full support of the general scope and analogy of Holy Scripture.

[14]It is interesting to look at this entire subject of the ark and deluge, in connection with that most important and deeply significant ordinance of baptism. A truly baptized person, that is, one who, as the apostle says, "obeys from the heart that type of doctrine to which he is delivered," is one, who has passed from the old world into the new, in spirit and principle, and by faith. The water rolls over his person, signifying that his old man is buried, that his place in nature is ignored, that his old nature is entirely set aside; in short, that he is a dead man. When he is plunged beneath the water, expression is given to the fact that his name, place, and existence, in nature, are put out of sight; that the flesh, with all that pertained thereto, its sins, its iniquities, its liabilities, is buried in the grave of Christ, and never can come into God's sight again.Again, when he rises up out of the water, expression is given to the truth, that he only comes up as the possessor of a new life, even the resurrection life of Christ. If Christ had not been raised from the dead, the believer could not come up out of the water, but should remain buried beneath its surface, as the simple expression of the place which righteously belongs to nature. But, inasmuch as Christ rose from the dead, in the power of a new life, having entirely put away our sins, we also come up out of the water; and, in so doing, set forth the fact, that we are put, by the grace of God, and through the death of Christ, in full possession of a new life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. "We are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (See Rom. vi. and Col. ii.passim. Comp. also 1 Peter iii. 18-22.) All this makes the institution of baptism one of immense importance, and pregnant with meaning.

Again, when he rises up out of the water, expression is given to the truth, that he only comes up as the possessor of a new life, even the resurrection life of Christ. If Christ had not been raised from the dead, the believer could not come up out of the water, but should remain buried beneath its surface, as the simple expression of the place which righteously belongs to nature. But, inasmuch as Christ rose from the dead, in the power of a new life, having entirely put away our sins, we also come up out of the water; and, in so doing, set forth the fact, that we are put, by the grace of God, and through the death of Christ, in full possession of a new life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. "We are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (See Rom. vi. and Col. ii.passim. Comp. also 1 Peter iii. 18-22.) All this makes the institution of baptism one of immense importance, and pregnant with meaning.

[15]I would here offer a remark as to the word "perfect." When Abraham was called upon to be "perfect," it did not mean perfect to himself; for this he never was, and never could be. It simply meant that he should be perfect as regards the object before his heart,—that his hopes and expectations were to be perfectly and undividedly centred in the "Almighty God."In looking through the New Testament, we find the word "perfect" used in at least four distinct senses. In Matt. v. 48, we read, "Be ye thereforeperfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Here we learn from the context that the word "perfect" refers to the principle of our walk. At verse 44, we read, "love your enemies, ... that ye may be the sons of your Father which is in heaven; for he maketh the sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth rain upon the just and the unjust." Hence to be "perfect" in the sense of Matt. v. 48 is to act on a principle of grace toward all, even toward those who are injurious and hostile. A Christian going to law, and asserting or contending for his rights, is not "perfect as his Father;" for his Father is dealing ingrace, whereas he is dealing inrighteousness.The question here is not as to the right or wrong of going to law with worldly people (as to brethren, 1 Cor. vi. is conclusive). All I contend for is, that a Christian so doing is acting in a character the direct opposite to that of his Father; for assuredly he is not going to law with the world. He is not now on a judgment-seat, but on a mercy-seat—a throne of grace. He showers his blessings upon those who, were he to go to law with them, should be in hell. Wherefore it is plain that a Christian, when he brings a man before the judgment-seat, is not "perfect as his Father which is in heaven is perfect."At the close of Matt. xviii. we have a parable which teaches us that a man who asserts his rights is ignorant of the true character and proper effect of grace. The servant was notunrighteousin demanding what was due to him; but he wasungracious. He was totally unlike his master. He had been forgiven ten thousand talents, and yet he could seize his fellow by the throat for a paltry hundred pence. What was the consequence? He was delivered to the tormentors. He lost the happy sense ofgrace, and was left to reap the bitter fruits of having asserted hisrights, while being himself a subject ofgrace. And, observe further, he was called "awickedservant," not because of having owed "ten thousand talents," but because of not having forgiven the "hundred pence."The masterhad ample grace to settle the former, buthehad not grace to settle the latter. This parable has a solemn voice for all Christians going to law; for although in the application of it, it is said, "so shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you from your heart, forgive not every onehis brothertheir trespasses," yet is the principle of general application, that a man acting in righteousness will losethe senseof grace.In Hebrews ix. we have another sense of the term "perfect." Here, too, the context settles the import of the word. It is "perfect, as pertaining to the conscience." This is a deeply important use of the term. The worshipper under the law never could have a perfect conscience, for the simplest reason possible, because he never had a perfect sacrifice. The blood of a bullock and a goat did well enoughfor a time, but it could not doforever, and therefore could not give a perfect conscience. Now, however, the weakest believer in Jesus is privileged to have a perfect conscience. Why? Is it because he is abetter manthan the worshipper under the law? Nay; but because he has gotten abetter sacrifice. If Christ's sacrifice is perfect forever, the believer's conscience is perfect forever. The two things necessarily go together. For the Christian not to have a perfect conscience is a dishonor to the sacrifice of Christ. It is tantamount to saying that his sacrifice is only temporary, and not eternal in its effect; and what is this but to bring it down to the level of the sacrifices under the Mosaic economy.It is very needful to distinguish between perfection in the flesh and perfection as to conscience. To pretend to the former, is to exaltself; to refuse the latter, is to dishonor Christ. The babe in Christ should have a perfect conscience; whereas St. Paul had not, nor could have, perfect flesh. The flesh is not presented in the word as a thing which is to be perfected, but as a thing which has been crucified. This makes a wide difference. The Christian has sin in him, but notonhim. Why? Because Christ who had no sininhim, ever, had sin on him when he was nailed to the cross.Finally, in Phil. iii. we have two other senses of the word "perfect." The apostle says, "not as though I had already attained, either were alreadyperfect;" and yet a little farther on he says, "Let as many as beperfectbe thus minded." The former refers to the apostle's full and everlasting conformity to Christ in glory. The latter refers to our having Christ as the all-engrossing object before the heart's affections.

In looking through the New Testament, we find the word "perfect" used in at least four distinct senses. In Matt. v. 48, we read, "Be ye thereforeperfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Here we learn from the context that the word "perfect" refers to the principle of our walk. At verse 44, we read, "love your enemies, ... that ye may be the sons of your Father which is in heaven; for he maketh the sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth rain upon the just and the unjust." Hence to be "perfect" in the sense of Matt. v. 48 is to act on a principle of grace toward all, even toward those who are injurious and hostile. A Christian going to law, and asserting or contending for his rights, is not "perfect as his Father;" for his Father is dealing ingrace, whereas he is dealing inrighteousness.

The question here is not as to the right or wrong of going to law with worldly people (as to brethren, 1 Cor. vi. is conclusive). All I contend for is, that a Christian so doing is acting in a character the direct opposite to that of his Father; for assuredly he is not going to law with the world. He is not now on a judgment-seat, but on a mercy-seat—a throne of grace. He showers his blessings upon those who, were he to go to law with them, should be in hell. Wherefore it is plain that a Christian, when he brings a man before the judgment-seat, is not "perfect as his Father which is in heaven is perfect."

At the close of Matt. xviii. we have a parable which teaches us that a man who asserts his rights is ignorant of the true character and proper effect of grace. The servant was notunrighteousin demanding what was due to him; but he wasungracious. He was totally unlike his master. He had been forgiven ten thousand talents, and yet he could seize his fellow by the throat for a paltry hundred pence. What was the consequence? He was delivered to the tormentors. He lost the happy sense ofgrace, and was left to reap the bitter fruits of having asserted hisrights, while being himself a subject ofgrace. And, observe further, he was called "awickedservant," not because of having owed "ten thousand talents," but because of not having forgiven the "hundred pence."The masterhad ample grace to settle the former, buthehad not grace to settle the latter. This parable has a solemn voice for all Christians going to law; for although in the application of it, it is said, "so shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you from your heart, forgive not every onehis brothertheir trespasses," yet is the principle of general application, that a man acting in righteousness will losethe senseof grace.

In Hebrews ix. we have another sense of the term "perfect." Here, too, the context settles the import of the word. It is "perfect, as pertaining to the conscience." This is a deeply important use of the term. The worshipper under the law never could have a perfect conscience, for the simplest reason possible, because he never had a perfect sacrifice. The blood of a bullock and a goat did well enoughfor a time, but it could not doforever, and therefore could not give a perfect conscience. Now, however, the weakest believer in Jesus is privileged to have a perfect conscience. Why? Is it because he is abetter manthan the worshipper under the law? Nay; but because he has gotten abetter sacrifice. If Christ's sacrifice is perfect forever, the believer's conscience is perfect forever. The two things necessarily go together. For the Christian not to have a perfect conscience is a dishonor to the sacrifice of Christ. It is tantamount to saying that his sacrifice is only temporary, and not eternal in its effect; and what is this but to bring it down to the level of the sacrifices under the Mosaic economy.

It is very needful to distinguish between perfection in the flesh and perfection as to conscience. To pretend to the former, is to exaltself; to refuse the latter, is to dishonor Christ. The babe in Christ should have a perfect conscience; whereas St. Paul had not, nor could have, perfect flesh. The flesh is not presented in the word as a thing which is to be perfected, but as a thing which has been crucified. This makes a wide difference. The Christian has sin in him, but notonhim. Why? Because Christ who had no sininhim, ever, had sin on him when he was nailed to the cross.

Finally, in Phil. iii. we have two other senses of the word "perfect." The apostle says, "not as though I had already attained, either were alreadyperfect;" and yet a little farther on he says, "Let as many as beperfectbe thus minded." The former refers to the apostle's full and everlasting conformity to Christ in glory. The latter refers to our having Christ as the all-engrossing object before the heart's affections.

[16]It would furnish a very searching question for the heart, in reference to every undertaking, were we to ask, "Am I doing this by faith?" "Whatever is not of faith is sin;" and, "Without faith it is impossible to please God."

[17]We should ever remember, in a place of trial, that what we want is not a change of circumstances, but victory over self.

[18]It is deeply interesting to the spiritual mind to mark how sedulously the Spirit of God, in Rom. ix. and indeed throughout all scripture, guards against the horrid inference which the human mind draws from the doctrine of God's election. When he speaks of "vessels of wrath," he simply says, "fitted to destruction." He does not say that God "fitted" them.Whereas, on the other hand, when he refers to "the vessels of mercy" he says, "whomhehad afore prepared unto glory." This is most marked.If my reader will turn for a moment to Matt. xxv. 34-41, he will find another striking and beautiful instance of the same thing.When the king addresses those on his right hand, he says, "Come, yeblessed of my Father, inherit the kingdomprepared for youfrom the foundation of the world." (Verse 34.)But when he addresses those on his left, he says, "Depart from me, ye cursed." He does not say, "cursed of my Father." And, further, he says, "into everlasting fire, prepared," not foryou, but "for the devil and his angels." (Verse 41.)In a word, then, it is plain that God has "prepared" a kingdom of glory, and "vessels of mercy" to inherit that kingdom; but he has not prepared "everlasting fire" for men, but for the "devil and his angels;" nor has he fitted the "vessels of wrath," but they have fitted themselves.The word of God as clearly establishes "election" as it sedulously guards against "reprobation." Every one who finds himself in heaven will have to thank God for it; and every one that finds himself in hell will have to thank himself.

Whereas, on the other hand, when he refers to "the vessels of mercy" he says, "whomhehad afore prepared unto glory." This is most marked.

If my reader will turn for a moment to Matt. xxv. 34-41, he will find another striking and beautiful instance of the same thing.

When the king addresses those on his right hand, he says, "Come, yeblessed of my Father, inherit the kingdomprepared for youfrom the foundation of the world." (Verse 34.)

But when he addresses those on his left, he says, "Depart from me, ye cursed." He does not say, "cursed of my Father." And, further, he says, "into everlasting fire, prepared," not foryou, but "for the devil and his angels." (Verse 41.)

In a word, then, it is plain that God has "prepared" a kingdom of glory, and "vessels of mercy" to inherit that kingdom; but he has not prepared "everlasting fire" for men, but for the "devil and his angels;" nor has he fitted the "vessels of wrath," but they have fitted themselves.

The word of God as clearly establishes "election" as it sedulously guards against "reprobation." Every one who finds himself in heaven will have to thank God for it; and every one that finds himself in hell will have to thank himself.

[19]No doubt, when faith allows God to act, he will use his own agency; but this is a totally different thing from his owning and blessing the plans and arrangements of unbelief and impatience. This distinction is not sufficiently understood.

[20]Joseph's wife sets forth the Church as united to Christ in his glory; Moses' wife presents the Church as united to Christ in his rejection.

[21]The close of Jacob's career stands in most pleasing contrast with all the previous scenes of his eventful history. It reminds one of a serene evening, after a tempestuous day: the sun, which during the day had been hidden from view by clouds, mists, and fogs, sets in majesty and brightness, gilding with his beams the western sky, and holding out the cheering prospect of a bright to-morrow. Thus is it with our aged patriarch. The supplanting, the bargain-making, the cunning, the management, the shifting, the shuffling, the unbelieving selfish fears,—all those dark clouds of nature and of earth seem to have passed away, and he comes forth in all the calm elevation of faith, to bestow blessings, and impart dignities, in that holy skilfulness, which communion with God can alone impart.Though nature's eyes are dim, faith's vision is sharp. He is not to be deceived as to the relative positions assigned to Ephraim and Manasseh in the counsels of God. He has not, like his father Isaac, in Chapter xxvii., to "tremble very exceedingly," in view of an almost fatal mistake. Quite the reverse. His intelligent reply to his less instructed son is, "I know it, my son, I know it." The power of sense has not, as in Isaac's case, dimmed his spiritual vision. He has been taught in the school of experience the importance of keeping close to the divine purpose, and nature's influence cannot move him from thence.In Chapter xlviii. 11, we have a very beautiful example of the mode in which our God ever rises above all our thoughts, and proves himself better than all our fears. "And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face; and, lo, God hath showed me also thy seed." To nature's view, Joseph was dead; whereas in God's view he was alive, and seated in the highest place of authority, next the throne. "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." (1 Cor. ii. 9.) Would that our souls could rise higher in their apprehension of God and his ways.It is interesting to notice the way in which the titles "Jacob" and "Israel" are introduced in the close of the Book of Genesis; as, for example, "One toldJacob, and said, Behold thy son Joseph cometh unto thee: andIsraelstrengthened himself, and sat upon the bed." Then, it is immediately added, "AndJacobsaid unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz." Now, we know, there is nothing in scripture without its specific meaning, and hence this interchange of names contains some instruction. In general, it may be remarked, that "Jacob" sets forth the depth to which God had descended; "Israel," the height to which Jacob was raised.

Though nature's eyes are dim, faith's vision is sharp. He is not to be deceived as to the relative positions assigned to Ephraim and Manasseh in the counsels of God. He has not, like his father Isaac, in Chapter xxvii., to "tremble very exceedingly," in view of an almost fatal mistake. Quite the reverse. His intelligent reply to his less instructed son is, "I know it, my son, I know it." The power of sense has not, as in Isaac's case, dimmed his spiritual vision. He has been taught in the school of experience the importance of keeping close to the divine purpose, and nature's influence cannot move him from thence.

In Chapter xlviii. 11, we have a very beautiful example of the mode in which our God ever rises above all our thoughts, and proves himself better than all our fears. "And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face; and, lo, God hath showed me also thy seed." To nature's view, Joseph was dead; whereas in God's view he was alive, and seated in the highest place of authority, next the throne. "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." (1 Cor. ii. 9.) Would that our souls could rise higher in their apprehension of God and his ways.

It is interesting to notice the way in which the titles "Jacob" and "Israel" are introduced in the close of the Book of Genesis; as, for example, "One toldJacob, and said, Behold thy son Joseph cometh unto thee: andIsraelstrengthened himself, and sat upon the bed." Then, it is immediately added, "AndJacobsaid unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz." Now, we know, there is nothing in scripture without its specific meaning, and hence this interchange of names contains some instruction. In general, it may be remarked, that "Jacob" sets forth the depth to which God had descended; "Israel," the height to which Jacob was raised.

Transcribers notes:Maintained original spelling and punctuation.

Maintained original spelling and punctuation.

Back to Index Next