a convenient distance; there a crowd collects, and a promis cuous company is formed. Here the young man learns from his superior the rudiments of vice, and the inexperienced young woman is often caught by the attentions of some decoying villain, who has assumed the garb and manners of a gentleman. Here the habits of intemperance are often formed, and the young tradesman, or mechanic, while he neglects public worship, and violates the Sabbath, sows the prolific seeds of future ruin. Expenses are incurred which are inconvenient; habits of dissipation are contracted; dangerous acquaintances are formed, and opinions imbibed, which will operate like secret poison on the moral principles of the young.

If, then, the object of government is to bring corruption into the dwellings of the industrious tradesman and mechanic; to multiply the miseries of seduction and female prostitution; to extend the evils of bankruptcy and the frauds connected with it; to add to the list of drunkards, already so enormous as to be appalling, to encourage dissipation so ruinous to the common people; to increase and perpetuate pauperism, and to fill our poor-houses and prisons with tenants; in short, to bring in luxury, extravagance, and every species of excess and misery; let the Sabbath be abolished, or spent in idle dissipation.

But if it is the policy, as certainly it is the interest of civil rulers, to promote order, purity, peace, sobriety, industry, and every species of virtue, and domestic comfort; if they would set up an effectual barrier against the torrent of vice and debauchery; if they would preserve and advance the civilization of the people; if they would avoid the just vengeance of Heaven, on account of national sins, let them be careful to enact wholesome laws for the observation of the Sabbath; and when such laws already exist, let them be promptly and impartially executed; and let all the people REMEMBER THE SABBATH DAY TO KEEP IT HOLY.

ART. IV.-REMARKS ON GALATIANS, Chap. IV. 21—31.*

Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι, τὸν νόμον ἐκ ἀκέετε; Γέγραπίαι γὰρ ὅτι ̓Αβραὰμ δύο υἱὲς ἔσχεν· ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης, και ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας. Αλλ ̓ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης, κατὰ σάρκα γεγέννηται· ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ελευθέρας, διὰ τῆς ἐπαγγελίας. “Ατινὰ ἐσιν ἀλληγορεμενα· αὗται γάρ εἰσιν αἱ δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρος Σινᾶ, εἰς δελείαν γεννῶσα, ἥτις ἐςὶν Αγαρ. Τὸ γὰρ Αγαρ, Σινᾶ ἔρῶν ἐσιν ἐν τῇ Αραβία, (υσοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ιερεσαλήμ, δυλεύει δὲ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς. Ἡ δέ ἄνω Ιερκσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐςὶν, ἥτις ἐςὶ μήτης πάντων ἡμῶν. Γέγραπίαι γάρ Εὐφρανθηι σεῖρα ἡ ἐ τίκλεσα· ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ ἐκ ὠδίνεσα, ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμῳ μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχέσης τὸν ἄνδρα. Ἡμεῖς δὲ, ἀδελ φοί, κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ, ἐπα[γελίας τέκνα ἐσμέν. Ἀλλ ̓ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθείς, ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα· ὕτω καὶ νῦν. ̓Αλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή; Εκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην και τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς· ὃ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσῃ ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τῷ υἱῷ τῆς ἐλευθέρας. Αρα, ἀδελφοὶ, ἐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας.

"Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-maid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free-woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless, what saith the scripture? Cast out the bond-woman and her son: for

* We have received, from a highly respectable source, this exegetical discussion, which we conceive to be altogether worthy of the attention of our readers, and peculiarly within the scope of our publication. All responsibility, with regard to the sentiments of the paper, remains of course upon its author; and for this reason we admit it as the communication of an individual.

the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond-woman, but of the free."

THE passage just cited is confessedly one of the most difficult in the New Testament. Among the various explanations of it which have been given, I do not recollect to have seen that which is offered in the remarks which follow. It is offered without pretensions, and therefore without hesitation to your readers.

Every interpretation which has been given of this passage may be classed under one of three general views which have been taken of it.

The first is that of the "double sense." It was maintained by Chrysostom, Theophylact, and most of the other ancient fathers; and by Grotius, Henry, Scott, and many others among the moderns. They maintain that these verses contain Paul's exposition of the second and spiritual meaning of a passage which, in its primary signification, relates only to the personal history of several individuals in Abraham's family. Grotius, quoting Chrysostom, explains "A tá ist danyoрośμeva, v. 25. thus: "Sunt daλnyopμeva; i. e. figuram rei majoris continent." Henry says, "These things are an allegory, wherein besides the literal and historical sense of the words, the Spirit of God might design to signify something farther to us." Theophylact, paraphrasing the same words, says, 'Η μὲν ἱστορία αύτη οὐ μόνον τοῦτο δηλοῖ ἀλλὰ καὶ ἄλλα τινὰ αγορεύει· διὸ καὶ ἀλληγορία κέκληται· τύπος γὰς ἦσαν ἐκεῖνα τῶν παρόντων.

The next general view of the passage is that taken by most of the German commentators. It is, in short, that although the original narrative, Gen. xxi. 9-14. has but one meaning, and that the obvious and historical one; yet Paul, following the mode of interpretation prevalent among his countrymen, and familiar to those to whom he wrote, made a very different application of the passage, and one subservient to his present design. Representing the second as an allegory, he made it to teach the comparative merits and claims of the Mosaic and Christian dispensations, and the different fate of those who embraced them. According to Morus, Paul says, v. 24. “narrationem esse allegoricè explicandam, cum grammatico seu historico sensu, posse alium conjungi allegoricum. Ac Moses, dum illa narravit, sane non videtur in animo

habuisse illum alterum allegoricum sensum, sed Paulus explicans locum, sequitur suorum popularium morem. Koppe explains the first word of v. 24. by "this whole history may be explained in a much more exalted sense;" and immediately after denies that narrations merely historical, can in any one instance, in either sacred or profane writing, be certainly proved to have also a secondary meaning.

A third view is that of Borger. He says that the Apostle quoted the passage in Genesis, not for argument, but for illustration; and that he explains those characters and events, not as prefiguring the two covenants and those who were attached to them, but adduces them as exhibiting a remarkable similarity in several particulars to these, and therefore well calculated to set them before the Galatians in a clear and striking light.

His paraphrase of the first clause of v. 24. is, "which things may be excellently accommodated to our cause:" and he says, "Cum vero Paulus, Hagaram et Saram fuisse docet dúo diaonxv Turovs, id non ita interpretandum est, quasi illarum historia mulierum religionis Christianæ Judaicam illam aliquando eversuræ ad significationem jam habuerit: cum id tantum contendere videatur Apostolus, narrationem Mosis insigni similitudine cum religionis permutatione esse conjunctam adeoque aptissimè hanc cum illa comparari posse."

In cases, which, like the present, refer to the Old Testament history, or dispensation, it is indispensable that the whole ground be accurately examined, and it will here be of advantage to direct our first and particular efforts to obtaining an adequate understanding of the passage in the Old Testament; and then apply the light we have obtained to the elucidation of the place in the New.

What then is the plain, full meaning of the narrative in Gen. xxi. 9-14? What is the nature of the event there recorded? Let us endeavour to pursue this inquiry with all the assistance the Bible affords.

And here it is necessary, first of all, that adequate notions be entertained of the Abrahamic covenant. This matter shall be presented as briefly as possible, by the quotation of one or two passages of Scripture. Rom. iv. 13, 14. 16. "For the promise that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of none VOL. IV. No. IV.-3 X

effect. Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace, to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all." Here it is plain that the promises made in the Abrahamic covenant are fulfilled in the blessings conferred upon true believers. Again, Heb. vi. 13, 14. 17, 18, "For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath; that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us." From this passage it is plain that the oath recorded, Gen xxii. 16-20. confirmed those promises to which they became heirs, who, under the preaching of the Gospel, flee for refuge to the hope set before them. See also verses 19, 20. Of course the Abrahamic covenant embraced the whole covenant of grace, and was identical with it. And this is established by Gal. iii. 14-29. where the Apostle proves the validity of the Gospel covenant against that of the law, by its precedency in point of time, viz. 430 years. "That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

This whole argument depends on the identity of the Abrahamic covenant with the covenant of grace.

All the Apostles also in their preaching regarded the promises of the Abrahamic covenant, as embracing the spiritual blessings of the Gospel. After having proclaimed the doctrines and offers of the Gospel, they say, in applying them to the Jews whom they are addressing, (Acts, iii. 24-26.) "Ye are the children of the promise and of the covenant which God made with Abraham, saying, In thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." This last promise refers, according to Paul, Gal. iii. 16. exclusively to Christ.