not have been a man as much as Elijah, who is called an angel? I have thought that the spirits of good men are sometimes made ministering spirits; and why not, then, Gabriel one of these ? Olympas. He is distinguished as one of the heavenly host; and especially he says of himself that he stands in the presence of God. It is a pleasure for us to know that angels have assumed the appearance of men, and like men have their personal names. Reuben. But their names end all in El. Their names, you say, are all personal: how comes it, that they end all in el? tants are said to be in it at this day, Susan ? Susan. In the Appendix to the Family Testament it is said that there are some 2 or 3000 inhabitants, and the place is often visited by pilgrims, and is memorable for having been the residence of our Saviour for some thirty years. Olympas. Why did Gabriel visit Nazareth, Susan ? Susan. There was a virgin named Mary there, who was betrothed to one Joseph, a carpenter, and the angel went there to intimate to her that she should be the mother of our Lord and Saviour. Olympas. State the names and Olympas. That is a new idea, in-offices which this wonderful child was deed. Well, I will change my opinion, to assume. and say that El is their family name, and that all before that is their personal name. But how many celestial names have we on earth, Thomas? Thomas. With the help of the poets we have some four in common use. In the scriptures we have Gabriel and Michael, and they have added Raphael and Uriel. James. What does El mean? Susan. God, you know, is called El. Olympas. Then the family name is God; and Gabriel denotes "God is my excellency," and Michael denotes "One who has all,” and so they are all functionaries of God. Reuben. Then, as in earth, so in heaven, names are significant of relations and offices. Olympas. To what town was Gabriel sent, James? James. To Nazareth of Galilee. Olympas. Show me that place on your map. James. There is no map in my Testament. Olympas. You have not got the Family Testament, then. Susan. I have. See here is Nazareth, a town in Galilee, about 50 miles north of Jerusalem. Olympas. And how many inhabi William. His personal name was to be Jesus. He is also called "the Son of the Highest." He was to inherit the throne of his father David, to reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and to have an everlasting kingdom. Olympas. You will observe, then, that "the throne of David" and "the house of Jacob" comprehend more than the literal throne of David and the fleshly offspring of Jacob: for these are no more the peculiar people of God. But I will reserve this for a future lesson. I only wish at this time to mark the fact that Jesus inherits the sceptre of David, and is to govern the house of Jacob for ever. To whose personal influence is the creation of the body of Jesus assigned? Thomas. The Holy Spirit, the Power of the Highest, or God himself. Olympas. The body of Jesus is a creation of God, but the material is human flesh. God made but one human being out of the earth-our father Adam. The Holy Spirit came upon him, and the power of the Highest overshadowed him. He fell into a deep sleep, and from a rib taken out of his side God created a woman. And now we have the third display of the same power on the body of Mary. The Holy Spirit descends, and by a similar omnipotence fashions out of the body of Mary the body of Jesus. Adam was made out of the dust, therefore he is called human; Eve is made out of a rib, therefore she called woman; and Jesus is made out of the flesh of Mary, therefore is he called EMANUEL, GOD WITH US, the SON OF GOD, and the SON OF MAN. Therefore, said the angel, shall he be called the Son of God. He never had this name before, unless prospectively. He was called by other names, amongst which was THE WORD. and glory of God in the affairs of his providence. Hence he was employed to reveal to Daniel the scheme of providence in reference to the glory of God in the great work of man's redemption. So it come to pass that he is always employed in affairs connected with providence and redemption; and with the former only in reference to the latter. Michael denotes God's President-one who has all entrusted to him as a steward or president of affairs. He was the president angel of the Abrahamic race. There is not, said Gabriel, any that counsels with me in these affairs, but Michael your prince. - GaTHE WORD became in-briel calls him the chief or the head carnate. Reuben, relate what ensued of the princes. He is also called the after this visit of Gabriel to the Archangel. Concerning the person Virgin Mary. called Michael we have something more to say at another time. But to the history :-What are the circumstances of the birth of the son of Zacharias? Reuben. She burst forth into a rapturous eulogy on the mysterious and benignant promises of the Lord, especially his faithfulness in keeping his engagement with his people. Her words are, 66 My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour; because he has not disdained the low condition of his handmaid; for, henceforth all posterity will pronounce me happy. For the Almighty, whose name is venerable, has done wonders for me. His mercy on them who fear him, extends to generations of generations. He displays the strength of his arm, and dispels the vain imaginations of the proud. He pulls down potentates from their thrones, and exalts the lowly. The needy he loads with benefits; but the rich he spoils of every thing. He supports Israel his servant, (as he promised to our fathers,) ever inclined to mercy towards Abraham and his race." Eliza. I do not understand how the names Gabriel and Michael denote offices. Gabriel imports God is my excellency, and Michael One who has all. Olympas. The office of Gabriel was, then, to represent the excellency William. On the eight day he was circumcised and named. His rela tions would have him called after his father, but his mother would have him called John. Thomas. There must have been something in this name, as it seems there was some controversy about it. I should like to understand what mystery was in it. Olympas. It simply means the favor, or the favor of God. This is not the first time the name is found: it is the first of the New Testament occurrences of the word. Observe how ancient the custom of giving names at circumcision. Thomas. Is this the reason why names are given at baptism? Olympas. It is the reason. Hence the personal name of an individual is commonly called his Christian name. Thus, you may remember in the Catholic and Episcopalian Catechism, after the question, "What is your name?" comes "Who gave you that name?" This question is usually answered, "My godfather at my baptism?" Baptism, then, like circumcision, was the time of naming persons. The personal name was solemnly imposed when the names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were employed in the ritual of baptism. The cause of this I presume to be was the fact that the person with whom the covenant of circumcision was made had his name changed from Abram to Abraham; and as a new name was given to him at the time of circumcision, the Jews, and after them the Greek Christians, the Romanists, and some Protestants, reserved the imposition of a name on the child till the day of circumcision. Hence both John and Jesus received their names on the eighth day, at their circumcision. Why, Susan, did Zacharias ask for a writing table to write the name of his son ? Susan. Because he was dumb, not being able to speak since the angel Gabriel reproved him for his doubting his word. Olympas. Was he also deaf as well as dumb, William ? with another child six months younger than his son John, seem, like waters long dammed up, to burst forth in a mighty torrent. His ecstacy is beautifully expressed in the text"Blessed be the Lord the God of Israel, because he has visited and redeemed his people; and (as anciently he promised by his holy Prophets) has raised a Prince for our deliverance in the house of David his servant; for our deliverance from our enemies, and from the hands of all who hate us; in kindness to our fathers, and remembrance of his holy appointment; the oath which he sware to our father Abraham, to grant to us, that, being rescued out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve him boldly, in piety and uprightness, all the days of our life. And you, child, shall be called a Prophet of the Most High; for you shall go before the Lord, to prepare his way, by giving the knowledge of salvation to his people, in the remission of their sins, through the tender compassion of our God, who has William. We are not told that he caused a day-spring from on high to was deaf. visit us, to enlighten those who abide Reuben. But we may infer it. stances? Reuben. Because they made signs to him to know he would have him called. Now if he could have heard them, why not have asked him ? Olympas. This is, indeed, a strong presumptive evidence that he was deaf as well as dumb. It is an example of a fact that occasionally happens-viz. that inferential reasonings are sometimes as conculsive as express declarations. What remarks have you to make on the opening speech of Zacharias, Thomas? Thomas. You call it the opening speech, because the first speech after a dumbness of nine months, and the commencement of a new era in the life of this distinguished priest. His thoughts and musings on this great event in his life, and its connections The Holy Spirit speaks through Zacharias as through any of the Prophets. Hence the conclusion of his speech is prophetic of John and of Jesus. Is there not some peculiar views of salvation expressed in this speech of Zacharias, William ? William. "Salvation by the remission of sins" is the peculiar salvation to be preached by John and Jesus-not from the Roman yoke— not from their political enemies. I am, indeed, at a loss to know whether the phrase "the day-spring from on high" refers to John or Jesus. Olympas. John I understand to be a day-spring, not the day-spring from on high: so reads the original, as you see in the new version. Jesus is not "a day-spring," but the "Sun of Righteousness" himself. John was "a burning and a shining light" to the Gentiles and to Israel. He did, indeed, enlighten the world and prepare a people for the Lord. The salvation which he preached was from sin-from the guilt, power, and punishment of sin. Therefore his preaching had to do with confessing sin, repenting of sin, and the remission of sin-of which, in its proper place. But now we must attend to the time and circumstances of the birth of our Lord. Read, William the first fourteen verses of the next chapter, and then state to us the public fact that dates his nativity. William. The decree of Cesar Augustus for the taxing, or, as you have taught us, the enrolment of the land of Judea, it seems occasioned our Lord's birth at Bethlehem. But for the decree, it would appear, he had not been born in that royal city. Olympas. True. In what year was this decree, Thomas ? Thomas. I cannot so reconcile the various accounts of it I have read as to make it quite certain to my mind. Olympus. Our Lord was born four | years before the present Anno Domini -certainly in the fourth year before; and therefore his birth ought to be set down in the year of the world 4000. This would be the 26th year of the empire of Augustus, counting from the battle of Actium. The most accurate looking calculation, I have met with of the precise date of the nativity of the Messiah, places it about the close of the fourth year before the present Anno Domini, which is the year of the world 4004. Cyrenius, or Quirinius, had been deputy governor of Syria before the reign of Archelaus, as well as governor of that province after his reign. This fact reconciles all difficulties, and fixes our Lord's birth in the year of the world 4000, after the founding of Rome 749 years. That would make the world at present 5846 years old, and that brings the end of Daniel's days next year, or the year of the world | 5847. You will therefore in all your readings of Anno Domini remember that it commences four years after the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. Of this, however, we may have occasion to speak more particularly hereafter. A. CAMPBELL. COMPARING SPIRITUAL THINGS WITH SPIRITUAL. NO. IV. ADAM AND JESUS. I HAVE not overlooked J. B.'s remark : but, to the argument. We have now to see how Adam, in the particulars already laid down, is a "figure of him that was to come;" chiefly, as before observed, in a way of contrast. In every point already gone over, there is a correspondence or parallel between the two men who are the subject of this passage, Rom. v. 12-21-the first, Adam; the second, Jesus Christ. The substance of this is contained in the 18th and and 19th verses of the chapter, which verses follow upon verse 12, and com plete the sense. The particulars of the same truth are entered into, and further opened in the parenthesis (13-17) ; but in the 18th and 19th we read of the offence or disobedience of one man, to which is opposed the righteousness or obedience of one (that is, one man, as verse 15); also of the consequence of each-the judgment by the one; the free gift by the other being made sinner by the one, being made righteous by the other : and this leading on the one hand to eternal destruction-on the other hand to eternal life. First, then, it was necessary that a second man, another Adam should come into the world to destroy the evil brought upon it by the first. The last Adam was as truly man as the first, yet in some things unlike the first : unlike in this, that he was from everlasting, being the Son of God who is over all, GOD blessed for ever, Rom. ix. 5. He came into the | sons, men and women, came not by world by his own act and will, though in obedience to the will of the Father, as we read Ps. xl. 6-7, quoted Heb. x. 5-7; “Then said he (before he came) lo I come to do thy will, O God." Not so the first man: he was not till God formed him out of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Then he began to be and to live in this world without any act or will of his own in so doing. 2nd. Jesus, though born of woman, was without sin. It is asked, Job xxv. 4, “How can he be clean that is born of woman?" None, indeed, can who is born as every other person (except the son of Mary) has been from the beginning of the world, and will be to the end of it. But the body of Christ was a holy thing, Luke i. 35, not being begotten by man, but prepared of God for his own Son, Heb. x. 5, and therefore not sinful flesh, which comes by natural descent from Adam. It is remarkable that the corruption of the nature of man is never ascribed to the sin of the woman, though the woman sinned no less than the man, and was even the first in the transgression, Tim. ii. 14. Yet her sin is never spoken of as bringing any consequences after it upon the human race. It is by "one man" that sin entered into the world -by one man's" offence death reigned by one man's" disobedience many were made sinners. This is worthy of remark, because it may help us to understand how one might be clean, although born of a woman, and one only was so. It need hardly be added, that women are by nature as corrupt as men, though Mary is falsely and ignorantly called by Papists "the immaculate virgin." It is true, she was a holy woman, and one who found favor with God; yet in the flesh of Mary, the mother of Christ, dwelt no good thing. But as her sin, and the sin of all other per 66 66 Eve's transgression, but by Adam's— so Mary's sinfulness entailed no sin upon that holy thing which she conceived by the Holy Ghost. This contrast between the last Adam and the first is self-evident after Adam sinned; but it might appear at first sight that Adam, when he was created, was not inferior to Jesus in this very particular, namely, in having no sin. The flesh of Adam was, like every thing else that God had made, 66 very good;" but this absence of evil is not to be confounded with the spotlessness of the holy one of God. It was the goodness of a creature, and no more; and the absence of sin in any creature does not make it impossible that he should sin, as the event has fully shown, both in heaven and earth. The Son of God could not sin, his holiness being like that of the Father himself. When we say he could not sin, it does not mean by a kind of necessity which excludes the idea of choice or obedience, for God has rewarded him according to his righteousness-according to the cleanness of his hands in God's sight, (Ps. xviii. 20.) Yet there was no peradventure or contingency in Christ's obedience : it was infallibly certain, when he came into the world to do the will of God, that he would do it in every point, as it is infallibly certain that God, even the Father himself, will do nothing but what is right. If Adam had not sinned up to the present day, this would have been no security that he might not to-morrow; and so it must always be with creatures, unless they are secured by the promise of God that they never shall —as, no doubt, the holy angels arethe expression, elect angels, containing this in it; and so it will be with the elect among men, when raised and glorified with the Lord. 3rd. God gave Jesus, the second man, a command to fulfil, even as he did to Adam, the first man, though of quite a different kind. As far as we |