church" as life from the dead."

(Rom. xi. 15.)

Yet this earth is not designed to be the perpetual resting place of the church: for, even after the Millennium, there will be a lamentable defection from Christian principles and holy practice; Satan will be again loosed for a little season, and, previously to his final overthrow, will make one more desperate struggle to crush the cause of godliness, and to re-establish his dominion in the world. This apostacy, however, will be short, and immediately precedes the Saviour's second advent, the general resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, the execution of Divine wrath on the devil, his angels, and impenitent sinners, and the translation of the whole church of the redeemed to heavenly and eternal glory.

Such is the prophetical order of events as described in this chapter; wherein we may observe, that the second advent of Christ cannot be supposed to take place either at the commencement of the Millennium, or immediately at the close of it, but subsequently to the final apostacy. According to this view, the second advent will synchronize with the general resurrection of the dead; and both these events are to be contemplated as immediately preparatory to the final judgment of quick and dead, before the great white Throne. (Rev. xx. 12.)

A strong recommendation of this order of events is its well-known agreement with the statements which will be found in the creeds and formularies of our own church, and with the commonly-received views of the universal church in all ages. "We believe that Thou shalt come to be our Judge." "At whose coming all men shall rise again with their mortal bodies, and shall give account of their own works." "Christ sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty, from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead."

I. E. I.

THE ACTIVE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF

CHRIST.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

IT is maintained by some divines, that it is inconsistent with Scripture, with Church-of-England orthodoxy, and a mere Calvinian figment, to speak of what is sometimes called the active righteousness of Christ, his fulfilment of the law we had broken; in contradistinction to his passive righteousness, his "obedience unto death" as our sacrifice. I might quote many passages of Scripture to shew that both these points are there laid down: but as the objector alludes to the tenets of the Established Church, and urges that no expression is to be found in her formularies which recognizes such a doctrine, I beg leave to ask how he would construe the following passage in the collect for the Circumcision : "Almighty God, who madest thy blessed Son to be circumcised and obedient unto the law for man." Whether by the term Law is here meant the ceremonial or the moral law, the doctrine I am contending for is equally admitted in this expression. Your correspondents will perhaps point out other passages from our formularies bearing upon the question.

OXONIENSIS.

ON THE PHRASE THE CHARACTER OF GOD.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

YOUR correspondent Z. objects to the use of the phrase, "the character of God," as not being scriptural; and as an "unseemly approach to irreverent familiarity."

To the first objection, I reply, that convenience may sanction the use of expressions which, though not the express words of Scripture, are not unscriptural. Quakers dis

approve of the term "Trinity;" but it serves to express perspicuously in one word what could not be otherwise conveyed without a long paraphrase. Technical terms, when once explained and understood, become symbols of a whole train of ideas, which they recal to the mind in the most simple and concise form. When a theologian speaks of "the character of God," he means to recal to the mind of the hearer all that the Scriptures relate respecting that great and incomprehensible Being: and the hearer, in the rapid glance of thought, does so, according to his knowledge of what Scripture teaches, and his power of collecting at one view the scattered notices of his justice, his mercy, his truth, his providence, his grace; in short, all that refers to his Divine essence and influences.

With regard to the second objection of irreverent familiarity, this depends not upon the use of the phrase, "the character of God," but upon the manner in which the writer or speaker descants upon that character. It is not thought disrespectful for a loyal speaker or writer to dwell upon the just or amiable "character" of his sovereign, with a view to hold it up to public admiration. Disrespect could only arise if he alluded to that character in order to disparage it. And thus it is, though at an infinite distance, in speaking of God. We can never speak fully, or altogether rightly; but if we speak humbly and scripturally, there will be no want of reverence in our descanting upon his love, his equity, his promises; in a word, his all-perfect "character." F. R. M.

ON SCRIPTURAL GEOLOGY.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

HAVING just read over the articles on Geology in your late Numbers, I am desirous of drawing the attention of your readers to the real point in discussion. The question between Mr. Bugg and his opponents is this, Whether the inferences which modern geologists have deduced from their observation of the earth and its contents, are adverse to the testimony of Scripture: for I pass by, as of subordinate importance, the discussion of their philosophical accuracy, and of Mr. Bugg's counter theory. If God has declared in any authentic shape, that the account which is given by geologists of the earth and its origin is erroneous, it is erroneous; and all reasonings and appearances which lead them to these conclusions must be fallacious.

But then, the testimony of God should be plain and palpable, before it ought to be quoted in such a sense. The history of the Bible is not intended to instruct us in science; and all its statements must be understood as relating to our species and its destinies, unless they can be clearly proved to have a farther reference and wider application.

It appears therefore to me a matter of some importance, to determine what the Scriptures have plainly decided, and what they have left open to inquiry, that unfounded appeals may not be made to an infallible authority, and thus human investigations fettered and limited without occasion.

Accordingly, in this paper, I propose to examine those passages in the first chapter of Genesis, which seem to have any bearing on the theories of geologists; not with a view to determine their meaning,

but merely to ascertain what positions may be deduced from them as certain, and how far they preclude us from the adoption of those conclusions to which some reasoners have been led by these deprecated studies.

The first verse states, that "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." A question here arises; What time is meant by the beginning? Is it the beginning of all things, or the beginning of the solar system, or the beginning of our world? Look to the context. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters; and God said, Let there be light, and there was light." The narrative is apparently continuous; and therefore at first sight we should conceive that the same period is alluded to throughout. But this is the only reason for such a conclusion; and it is invalidated by observing, that the style of Moses is uniformly continuous,even where the greatest gaps remain to be supplied in the history. Thus, in the first verse of the twentieth chapter of the Book of Numbers, any cursory reader would imagine that the event there related, took place immediately after the occurrence recorded in the preceding chapter; whereas it is plain, by a comparison of dates, that thirtyeight years had intervened between them. But the use of the same absolute phrase, "In the beginning," at the commencement of St. John's Gospel, to describe our Lord Christ's Eternal Deity, seems to determine its sense to be "at the beginning of all things, before the commencement of the present system :" and then the first verse would convey simply the great truth, which otherwise is no where so distinctly taught, that God is the Creator of the universe, that he produced its vast materials out of nothing, and that they have no other original but his

will. The second verse then assumes a date in the history of his Divine transactions; namely, that date which marks the commencement of the only state of things in which we have any direct concern. At that date, whatever might have been the case earlier, the earth was without form; and the Almighty took that course with it which is afterwards related at large.

Some persons, it is possible, may not acquiesce in this construction of the passage; but I think no one can demonstrate that any narrower interpretation than this is intended. It is, at all events, open to this construction: and consequently no one who thinks he has reason for believing that the earth we now inhabit existed in some other form before the date above alluded to, ought to be opposed by a statement, that Moses has asserted the creation of the earth on the first of the six days, of which he subsequently describes the proceedings.

I will next pass on to the history of the fourth day, concerning which, it cannot be denied, that any cursory reader would at first suppose that it relates the formation of the sun, moon, and stars on that day: and yet, I imagine, there is not a man of education, now living, who believes that all the stars, of which modern astronomy has taught us to acknowledge the immeasurable distances and magnitudes, were created on that day. They must all therefore conceive, either that some other interpretation of the words is the true one, or that Moses has not related things as they were. But let us read his words, and examine what they really express, that we may not charge the sacred text with more than it contains. First, God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven!" This does not necessarily determine that the luminaries referred to had no previous existence, any more than the words, "God said, Let there be light," in the third verse, determine that the universe had, up to

that moment, been in darkness. It is enough to establish the truth of the last-cited text, if the earth alone was at that time in darkness; and it is enough for the verification of the first, if the luminaries, whether they existed or not, were not then in the firmament of the heavens; or, in other words, if they were not visible in that expanse of sky, which now seems to exhibit them, as in a map before us. The words may be literally translated either, "Let luminaries be in the firmament of the heaven;" or, "Let the luminaries in the firmament of the heaven be"for the purposes there mentioned; namely, those of giving light on the earth, and marking its seasons: and no inference ought to be pressed against any one, as deducible from this text, which would be met by adopting either of these interpretations.

But it may be argued, that whatever may be our construction of the fourteenth verse, the sixteenth plainly declares that the sun and moon were made on the fourth day. I think otherwise: for in the first place, it declares as much concerning the stars as it does concerning the sun and moon; and any one who presses another with the formation of the sun and moon on that day, ought himself to hold that all the stars in the universe were formed on that day likewise. But secondly, it is well known that the Hebrews have but one past tense, and are consequently unable to distinguish the pluperfect from the perfect. Our translators, however, never scruple to distinguish these tenses, whenever sufficient reasons are ap. parent to guide them in the discrimination. For example, it might be inferred from the last verse of the eleventh chapter of Genesis, and the first of the twelfth, that the Lord did not call Abram when he was in Ur of the Chaldees, nor till after his father's death in Haran. This, however, would be contradictory to other texts of Scripture; and therefore our translators, to obviate

the apparent contradiction, introduce the auxiliary, had, thus throwing the second statement backward, to a date prior to the first. They have not done so here, because they saw no reason for doing so. But reasons may afterwards be discovered; and those who feel the force of them, are as much at liberty to translate the sixteenth verse of the first chapter in the pluperfect tense, as our venerable translators themselves were so to translate the first verse of the twelfth. The statement would in that case be, that God had previously made the sun, moon, and stars; and that he then displayed them in the expanse of the sky, to give light upon the earth, and to mark its revolving seasons for the use of men. They are not always to be seen there, even when we are sensible of their light. A foggy atmosphere, or a thick curtain of clouds will hide them from our view, without casting us back into original darkness: and this might have been the case during the first three days, after light was admitted, and had penetrated to the surface of our globe.

I do not affirm, that this is the true construction of the text: I only say, that no person can be justly stigmatized as an unbeliever, for denying that the sun was formed on the fourth day, unless the incorrectness of this interpretation can first be demonstrated. And on the whole, I am persuaded that nothing is contained in the Mosaic narrative, or in the whole Bible, which affects any conclusion to which geologists have, or may, come, concerning preexistent forms of our globe.

There is indeed one speculation of geologists, which does appear to me to militate against the text of Scripture. It is that which has been, and may still be, held by many of them, concerning the long periods of time which they would substitute for days. It strikes me, that the consecration of the seventh day, as related in the second verse of the second chapter, determines

the limit of the word day, to one revolution of the earth on its axis; and every attempt to reconcile any other interpretation with the sacred text, is in my eyes an evasion. This, however, it is to be observed, is not a speculation produced by simply following geological discoveries, wherever they may lead us, but by forced attempts to reconcile them with Scripture.

Some good men are also staggered by the language of geologists, concerning the successive and sweeping destruction of plants and animals, before the time of Adam, as though it were at variance with Divine truth and yet I can find nothing in all the Bible which contradicts it. The most forcible text which can he produced (Rom. v. 12)," By one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned," is studiously limited to mankind by the words, "all men;" or, if the phrase "death entered into the world," be more comprehensive than that which immediately follows it, "death passed upon all men;" it would be unwarrantable to extend the meaning of that word beyond the present system of things, so as to include other worlds, if any such there were, as geologists teach us, having been previously formed out of the same materials, differently combined, which were subsequently prepared in six days for the residence of Death may exist in other worlds it may have existed in worlds which themselves have perished, or have been renewed, or even in the globe from which our present earth was produced, without contravening a text which clearly relates, in its obvious meaning and doctrine, to the existence of death in mankind; a race created and designed for immortality.

man.

:

These remarks are submitted to the consideration of your readers, with a view to invite their inquiry into what I regard as a grave question, not to be mixed up with cri

minating insinuations and charges, but to be deliberately and calmly weighed; namely, whether there be, or be not, any declaration in Scripture, which ought to preclude us from adopting any of the conclusions which geological investigations, so far as they have been hitherto prosecuted, may lead us; and if there be, what they are, and what is the precise amount of them; because, as on the one hand I should esteem any clear and positive declaration of God's word, a plain proof of some fallacy in the reasoning which would contradict it, so on the other hand the cause of truth must suffer from attempts to fasten upon scientific inquirers, accusations of opposing revelation, which cannot be substantiated.

A CLERICAL HINT.

D. D.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

I REQUEST permission respectfully to submit to the clerical readers of your miscellany, whether a letter of admonition, addressed by each of them to his successor, and to be presented to him when the writer shall have quitted this mortal life, night not be greatly instrumental to the glory of God, and the salvation of their respective charges. Let such a communication be drawn up wisely, meekly, faithfully, and in the spirit of Christian affection; let it consist of such local information as may be important to the overseer of the flock; of suitable remarks on the character of his parishioners; of earnest appeals to the conscience of the successor; of attractive views of the grace and glory of the Saviour; of strong representations of the happiness of a good shepherd, and of the unspeakable danger of the mere hireling; of cautions against worldly communications, and the dissipation of time; and finally, let this posthumous epistle remind him, how