Earlier text: The Empire of RomeNOTES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LESSON.
By A. T. Jones
JONAH lived during the reign of Jeroboam II.; for we read in the account of what Jeroboam did that "he restored the coast of Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the Lord God of Israel, which he spake by the hand of his servant Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of Gath-hepher." 2 Kings 14: 25. As was related in our last lesson, "Hazael, king of Syria, oppressed Israel all the days of Jehoahaz," and Elisha, just before his death, had prophesied to Joash Israel's deliverance from Syria. But as Joash, in obeying the prophet's word to smite with the arrows upon the ground, had shown his lack of persistence in smiting only three times, whereas he should have smitten till directed to hold, the prophet said to him, "Thou shouldst have smitten five or six times; then hadst thou smitten Syria till thou hadst consumed it; whereas now thou shalt smite Syria but thrice." Accordingly Joash smote Syria three times, and no more; and then it fell to Jeroboam II. to complete the deliverance of Israel from the oppressions of Syria. "For the Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter; for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel. And the Lord said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven; but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of Joash." 2 Kings 14: 26, 27. And it was the prophet Jonah that directed, encouraged, and strengthened Jeroboam in his appointed work, because the Lord was gracious to Israel and had compassion on them, "because of his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." Jeroboam, the son of Joash, reigned from B. C. 827 to 786, and it was in the former part of his reign that Jonah prophesied, (1) Because, as we have seen, it was at the word of Jonah that victory was given to Jeroboam, and that Israel recovered his possessions; and (2) Because of these successes Israel became exalted, and then Amos prophesied Israel's captivity and destruction. And Amos says he prophesied "in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel, two years before the earthquake." Amos 1: 1; 7: 7-17. Uzziah began to reign in the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam, which would be in the year 800 B. C.; and this would leave only fourteen years of the reign of Jeroboam, so that Amos prophesied between the years 800 and 786 B. C. Therefore Jonah's prophesying in the early years of Jeroboam's reign, must have been from B. C. 827 down to about 810 B. C. NINEVEH, to which Jonah was commanded to go, was the capital of the Assyrian Empire. It was situated on the River Tigris, 36° 20' north latitude, 43° 10' east longitude, and was 600 miles from Jonah's home. Vul-lush III. was king of the city of Nineveh and the empire of Assyria from 810 to 781 B. C., and it is most likely that it was in his reign that Jonah was sent on this mission to Nineveh. It may have been in the reign of Vul-lush's predecessor, Shamas-Vul, who reigned from 823 to 810. We cannot tell yet exactly in which it was; but we may be almost certain that it was in the reign of one of these two kings that Jonah was sent to Nineveh. Vul-lush had great success in all his expeditions; he extended his dominions in almost every direction, and it is most likely that the wealth acquired from the tribute of all the nations round about had induced that state of luxury and dissipation which called for destruction unless immediate repentance was shown. THEREFORE the Lord said to Jonah, "Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me." The Lord has left no nation to itself without full opportunity to know and serve him. Here his prophet is sent to the capital of Assyria, whose empire then ruled from Egypt and the Great Sea to Central Asia, and from the Persian Gulf to the mountains of Armenia. Before this his prophets had spoken directly to, and had even anointed, a king of Syria. Afterward he spoke in a dream, and then by his prophet, to the great Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon; and Nebuchadnezzar published a letter to all people, nations, and languages that he "thought it good to show the signs and wonders that the high God hath wrought toward" him. Dan. 4: 2. From Jeremiah the Lord sent messages to Edom, and Moab, and Ammon, and Tyre, and Sidon. Jer. 27: 3-7. He spoke to Cyrus and to Alexander the Great. We repeat, God has left no nation without a knowledge of himself, and no nation has ever been left to itself without warning. BUT Jonah was not willing to carry the Lord's message to this perishing city. "Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord." Nineveh lay about six hundred miles to the east, and Jonah started to go about three thousand miles to the westward; for Tarshish was on the southwest coast of Spain. But Jonah was open-hearted about it; he did not pretend, as many people now do, to be obeying the Lord by going directly opposite to what the Lord told him. He was disobedient, and he intended it to be considered so. But now, thousands of people, in effect, do just as Jonah did, and then try to convince themselves that they are obeying the Lord. The Lord says to all people, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." Thousands of people will work all day the seventh day, and then do no work on the first day, and pretend that in this they are obeying the commandment of God. But to rest on the first day of the week is no more obedience to the commandment of God to keep the Sabbath than it was obedience for Jonah to go to Tarshish when the Lord told him to go to Nineveh. If you are going to obey the Lord, do it; and if you are determined to disobey, do that; but don't try to pass off disobedience for obedience, and so deceive yourself. "And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us." Deut. 6: 25. JONAH "went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish; so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. But the Lord sent out a great wind." This was a euroclydon, such as struck the ship on which Paul was being taken a prisoner to Rome. "And there was a mighty tempest in the sea." "Then the mariners were afraid, and cried every man unto his god, and cast forth the wares that were in the ship into the sea, to lighten it of them. But Jonah was gone down into the sides of the ship; and he lay, and was fast asleep." Jonah seems to have felt perfectly safe, although he knew he was disobeying God. So do many people. And, as then, innocent persons are thrown into trial and distress because of their careless disobedience. "So THE shipmaster came to him, and said unto him, What meanest thou, O sleeper? arise, call upon thy God, if so be that God will think upon us, that we perish not." Then they cast lots to find whose was the fault that the storm was upon them, and the lot fell upon Jonah. "Then said they unto him, Tell us, we pray thee, for whose cause this evil is upon us. What is thine occupation? and whence comest thou? what is thy country? and of what people art thou? And he said unto them, I am an Hebrew; and I fear the Lord, the God of Heaven, which hath made the sea and the dry land. Then were the men exceedingly afraid." They knew that the God who made the sea and the dry land must be above all gods, and so when they heard of him, they were "exceedingly afraid." THEN, knowing that Jonah was the cause of all their trouble, "they said unto him, What shall we do unto thee, that the sea may be calm unto us? for the sea grew more and more tempestuous" [margin]. And he said unto them, Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you. Nevertheless the men rowed hard to bring it to the land; but they could not." Even against the evidence of the lot, and the convincing word of Jonah, the men labored hard to deliver themselves rather than pitch him into the sea; but it was all no use; overboard he had to go. So the men "cried unto the Lord. . . . Lay not upon us innocent blood." "So they took up Jonah, and cast him forth into the sea; and the sea ceased from her raging. Then the men feared the Lord exceedingly, and offered a sacrifice unto the Lord, and made vows." So the Lord turned Jonah's rebellion into good for those who knew not the Lord, and taught them of himself. "NOW THE LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." This part of the story is just as true as is any other. Jesus makes mention of this very verse of Jonah, in his preaching. And, having the indorsement of Christ, we know that it is as true as any other of his words, and they are all absolutely true; although the translation in the New Testament, which gives the word "whale," is not justifiable. The original says, The Lord had prepared a great fish. And a great fish was what it was. But because a whale is a great fish, it does not follow at all that this was a whale. There are great fish in the Mediterranean that can swallow not only a man, but a horse or a buffalo. In one such was found the whole body of a man in complete armor. In one was found a whole horse. In one was found the skin of a whole buffalo, which had been thrown overboard from the very ship which caught the fish. See Smith's Dictionary, Art. Whale. It was nothing strange or wonderful at all that such a great fish should swallow Jonah; and that the Lord should preserve him unhurt, was no more wonderful than to preserve the three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace, or Daniel in the den of hungry lions. "JEZEBEL . . . said, . . . Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel?" That is the way to provoke a man or a boy into doing some wicked or foolish thing. Ask him if he dare do it. "Stump" him to it. If a boy says his mother forbids his leaving school, ask him if he is tied to his mother's apron strings. If a young man declines a cigar or a glass of wine, on the ground that he has promised not to use anything of the sort, ask him if he has given up his liberty, and is no longer his own master. If a man refuses to be away from his home in the evening, to join old companions at the theater or the club-house, ask him if his wife keeps him in charge all the time. If he refuses to share in a dishonest transaction, or to make a bet, or to accept a challenge, tell him it is because he is afraid of what will come of it. It takes a stronger man to resist a wicked sneer of that sort, than to withstand almost any temptation to which he can be exposed.—Sel. Lives That Tell for Christ
It is not stately walls nor beauteous spires that tell for Christ, nor eloquent sermons, nor artistic anthems, but lives that are clean, hearts that are glad with the light of Christ, and hands that are loaded with mercy.—Sel. A Lesson in Christian Experience.
By Editor
A FRIEND proposes the following question: "Why is it that conscientious persons, who have long professed Christianity, and led exemplary lives, will sometimes be brought almost to the verge of despair over their own cases?" Our observation has been somewhat extensive, and we think we can solve the problem to the satisfaction of every one who has a true knowledge of Christian experience. 1. It is generally the conscientious and exemplary that pass through this experience. There may be exceptions, but we think they are only exceptions. We once had opportunity to preach to a company who were, till then, strangers to us, who appeared to be living Christians. We noticed their religious zeal and fervor, and said that, if their zeal was genuine, we should take the Bible and take away their good feeling; but if it was not of the Spirit of God, we might be unable to move it by Bible truth. They were much surprised at this announcement, but the reason of it will be made to appear. 2. It must be borne in mind that Christians in this world are in school. The appellation of "disciple" signifies a learner—a pupil. It is a sad mistake which many are making, to consider the converted soul a graduate instead of one just entering the school of Christ. Many think that they are saved, in so strong a sense as to almost place themselves beyond probation! Before their conversion they have no religious knowledge or experience whatever. After their conversion they look upon themselves as graduates, and not as disciples, or learners. They allow no chance to "grow in grace," for they think they are already full grown. They only increase in more self-assurance and self-sufficiency. The humble, contrite soul, who trembles at the word of the Lord (Isa. 66:1, 2), is looked upon by them as lacking in grace. We pity them, but they seldom place themselves in a position where they can be helped. Their standard of right is their own feelings, and nothing can shake their self-confidence as long as they feel well. And any message, even from the Scriptures of truth, which conflicts with their feelings, is regarded with suspicion; they consider it subversive of religion because it is not in harmony with their experience. As far as genuine Christianity is concerned, they are only self-satisfied dwarfs. 3. But there is another class consisting of those who rightly regard themselves, at their conversion, as "babes in Christ." They feel their insufficiency, and hear the admonition to grow in grace, and they hold themselves ever ready to learn more of the divine will. When they learn a new truth and a new duty presents itself to them, they approach the cross tremblingly, and humble themselves before God because they have so long walked in ignorance of his revealed word and contrary to his will. They may not give their testimony with as much assurance as the others; but they do not forget the injunction of the apostle in Rom. 11:20 (Be not highminded, but fear); and they best prove the blessing assured in Prov. 28:14 (Happy is the man that feareth alway). 4. Now we will make the application by referring to the company of whom we spoke at first. Most of them had enjoyed the power of godliness and the blessing of the Holy Spirit. We presented to them the prophecies concerning the last days, and the last message of Rev. 14, given immediately preceding the coming of the Son of man to reap the harvest of the earth. We preached not only "the faith of Jesus," but also "the commandments of God," as brought to view in that message. We commented upon each of the commandments, showing the perpetual obligation of the Sabbath of the Lord. They whose consciences were tender, who trembled at the word of the Lord, readily saw the force of the argument and the heavy cross which it involved, and "the spirit of groaning" rested upon them. Some, whose religion was more of the self-confident quality, heard it without a serious feeling, or a single conviction in regard to the truth of God's law, or to their obligation to walk in the way of increasing light shining from the word. But the more the truth was pressed home to the conscience, the more the beauty and harmony of the divine revelation was set before them, the more heavy became the burden of those of tender consciences. Now in such cases we have known ministers to advise the troubled ones to "stop thinking of these things, and the troubled state of mind will soon cease." Of course it will. Any sinner convicted by God's Spirit and word, can get rid of his convictions in the same way. But it is replied: "These are not sinners; they are Christians, long acquainted with the things of God's Spirit." But we answer: Every person who is living in violation of God's law is a sinner as far as that violation extends. "Sin is the transgression of the law;" and "by the law is the knowledge of sin." And any person may be a sinner, even unconsciously, until he becomes quite perfect in knowledge, because it is possible to sin ignorantly. See Num. 15:22-29. And when it shall "come to his knowledge" (Lev. 4:22-28), then he is required to take steps to secure forgiveness. In the case of the persons to whom we referred, their sin of breaking the Sabbath of the Lord came to their knowledge by the presentation of the law (by the law is the knowledge of sin), and their joy and peace of mind was not only restored, but increased by repentance and walking in the light presented. We have referred to these persons; we can refer to scores and hundreds who have passed through the same experience under our labors; and first of all, we can refer to our own experience. Our experience exactly corresponded with that of Paul, who had not known the strength and extent of the law until the Lord Jesus revealed himself, and moved upon his heart by the Spirit. "For I was alive [walking 'in all good conscience'] without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." Rom. 7:9. When the commandment comes, when the light of new truth is seen, when a new duty is presented, then is the critical period in the soul's experience. Were the people instructed properly, were they taught to keep their consciences tender and their minds open to the reception of new truths from God's word, were they not trained to believe that it is fully sufficient if the "articles of faith," the "discipline," or the "confession" is accepted and believed, then there would be no such critical period in our experience. But it is often true—unfortunately so, and it should never be so—that it is a heavier cross to accept a new Bible truth in the church, than to accept the truth of the whole Bible before entering the church. This is owing to the wrong teaching to which we have referred—that after conversion, and uniting with the church, the work is done; the person is saved; and if you are only honest, you need have no further concern for yourself. We verily believe that thousands in the churches have been lulled into a false security, and led to indulge a vain hope, by stifling their convictions of duty in regard to truth which has been presented to their minds. We have only feelings of strong sympathy for people in such a condition. We have been placed in the same situation, and have been made to realize the danger. But the power of the truth of the message to this generation (Rev. 14:9-12), so awfully solemn in its terms, prevailed over our fear of man and over our dread of the cross. The fear of man brings a snare, and the rejection of a cross leads to bondage, to darkness, and to death. We have known people to quiet their consciences over the neglect of duty and the rejection of the cross by being unusually religious in other points. But that is a deception of the worst nature. No show of piety, and no amount of prayer, will atone for neglect of duty. Any peace brought to the mind while evading a cross is but carnal security—a fatal delusion. We trust that we are understood in this our answer. God has continual claims on us; new duties are made known, and new crosses are presented. We are pupils in the school of our Master. We must not reject duty and evade crosses because we profess to be his children; but we must prove that we are his children, and worthy to be accepted of him, by accepting truth and duty and taking up crosses. If we are weak, his strength is perfected in our weakness, and his grace is sufficient for us He who said, "Without me ye can do nothing," has promised that he will never leave us nor forsake us if we will come unto him. If we are weary and heavy laden, we may come to him and find rest to our souls; but only on condition of learning of him, and bearing his yoke who was meek and lowly in heart. O that God may incline the hearts of the weary of soul to follow the footsteps of the lowly one, who did not his own will but the will of him who sent him! Stereotyped Labor.
By Editor
THERE is a great mistake made by many on this subject. They mistake stereotyped for systematic. System is a great aid in any kind of work; it is absolutely essential to the best success, in all business matters. But stereotyping in labor dwarfs all the powers, leading to listlessness or mere drudgery. This subject was up before our missionary societies some time since. Some, recognizing the fact that good letter-writing requires practice, study, and experience, recommended that printed letters be sent out in missionary correspondence. After careful consideration by the best and most experienced workers, it was decided that that was not the best way. It is decidedly the easiest way; but the easiest is not always the best. The strong objection is that in such labor there is no personal effort. The mind and heart are not enlisted as they are in writing the letters. Divine help is not looked for, because the work is prepared to hand, and will not be changed. There is no burden of soul put into the letter; there is no spirit in the correspondence so conducted. It is true that objections may be raised against other methods. If all write their own letters, there will be some poor letters written; some that cannot have a very good influence; some that will fail to interest the receiver. This is unfortunate. To write a good letter requires much practice, and we have been surprised, and filled with regret also, to find some who utterly refused to be instructed in this important branch of the work. They recognize the fact that an apprenticeship with instruction is necessary to become a good mechanic, and that study and practice with instruction are necessary to proficiency in every branch of literature and science; yet we have known them to refuse to correspond if their letters were to be examined in order that corrections or suggestions might be made. We cannot fathom the motives of all; but it would seem that they who refuse instruction in this matter must consider their work so perfect as to be above criticism, or else they649are not very anxious to improve their methods of labor. System requires study; stereotyping obviates study. We have known some extemporaneous speakers who were very systematic in their methods and their arguments. Such was Abraham Lincoln; among ministers we may mention Elder J. N. Andrews. But all such persons are laborious, painstaking students. Daniel Webster was complimented on a happy passage in his celebrated argument on the Constitution, which was considered a splendid off-hand effort; but he said the whole was the result of years of hard study, and he had spent hours in giving form to the idea which was being praised. To be systematic in extemporaneous address, the mind must of necessity be well stored with the matter under consideration; and to be impressive and convincing, the heart of the speaker must also be deeply impressed with his subject. These conditions are indispensable. And it is not enough that a person has at some time deeply studied the subject; he must review it and re-study it; he must be able to see new strength and new beauty in the truth which he presents, no matter how many times he may have spoken upon it before. Then his effort will be fresh, vigorous, and spontaneous. But if he depends altogether on the study which he has given to it years before; if it was arranged when studied, and used in that stereotyped form, then his address must be lacking in the elements which are necessary to real success. On this subject there is an impressive paragraph in 'Testimony for the Church, No. 32.' It is a repetition of the idea which had been previously enforced:— 'Some of these ministers make a mistake in the preparation of their discourses. They arrange every minutia with such exactness that they give the Lord no room to lead and impress their minds. Every point is fixed, stereotyped as it were, and they cannot depart from the plan marked out. This, of course, if continued, will cause them to become narrow-minded, circumscribed in their views, and will soon leave them as destitute of life and energy as are the hills of Gilboa of dew and rain. They must throw the soul open, and let the Holy Spirit take possession to impress the mind. When everything is laid out beforehand, and they feel that they cannot vary from these set discourses, the effect is little better than that produced by reading a sermon.' The old style of sermonizing was to divide the sermon under heads, firstly, secondly, thirdly, etc., and the minister who could not rise above fifthly or sixthly was not considered much of a preacher. Then came the "application" and the "improvement," and without just so much form and parade the sermon was not considered complete. The popular style at present is a written essay, which may be read with some degree of ease, that is, the reader may take his eyes from the manuscript, provided he has read it often enough! But neither of these methods is at all suitable for the proclamation of the present truth. A general's address to his army on the eve of an important battle, may be interesting to read in the history of the event; but should the general read it to the army, he would fail to raise enthusiasm for the occasion. We earnestly urge upon all who are entering the ministry, and all who are forming their habits of labor, to read the paragraph quoted above, and avoid the error pointed out. Let the mind and the heart be filled with the sacred truth committed to you, and then let the Spirit of God give you utterance. After becoming familiar with the truth, depend upon divine aid to so express it as to reach the hearts of others. We have known large audiences to be disappointed, and important meetings to fail of their object, because the minister officiating could not properly improve the occasion. His sermon was good, but it was stereotyped before these circumstances were presented. We have known old ideas to be preached to a waiting congregation—ideas which contained errors which have been exploded years ago—but which the minister was not able to correct, because he was not thoroughly studied in the truth. His sermon was prepared when those ideas were current, and feeling no necessity for study because of that preparation, he could but repeat the error. It was so in the sermon, and so it must be in the preaching! Our work is increasing, in magnitude, in interest, and in importance. We must "never stand still, till the Master appear," but "our talents improve," for we shall need them all if we are so favored as to be permitted to have a part in this glorious work even to the end. It is a work of study, of labor, of hardship, of crosses, and of privations; but it is a precious work, and we know of no greater calamity which could befall a laborer than to be dismissed from the service. We must not labor carelessly or "negligently." We fear that many of our missionary workers are not improving their talents as they should. They ought to be more efficient workers than they were a year ago, and see more fruit of their labors. And all, whatever our office or place, should be diligent, and study to show ourselves approved unto God, workmen that need not be ashamed when our work is examined and the account rendered. "From Adam to Moses."
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
A BROTHER writes as follows:— “Do you think that in the expression in Rom. 5: 14, ‘Death reigned from Adam to Moses,’ the apostle had reference to the resurrection of Moses; that the reign of death was there broken, as is inferred from Jude 9?” ANS.—No; there is no hint of the resurrection of Moses in the fifth of Romans. We give, in brief, the following reasons for this statement:— 1. The subject of the resurrection is not under consideration. The subject of discourse is justification by faith in Christ. In order to show the importance of this, the apostle shows that all are under condemnation of death through transgression of the law. “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men.” Wherever there is death it is an evidence of the existence of sin; and since “sin is not imputed when there is no law,” the fact that “death reigned from Adam to Moses,” shows that during all that time God’s law was known and transgressed. It was necessary to show the extent of the need, in order to show how greatly the grace of God abounded. In such an argument, to branch off upon the resurrection of Moses would be manifestly out of place. 2. The phrase “until the law,” indicates what time in the history of Moses is referred to. “From Adam to Moses,” then, simply means, from the creation to the giving of the law upon Sinai. Of course the text itself, speaking of sin, which is not imputed when there is no law, shows that the phrase “until the law,” does not mean that the law did not exist before. But if the time indicated in the expression, “Death reigned from Adam to Moses,” reaches only to the giving of the law upon Sinai, it certainly could have no reference to the resurrection of Moses, since he did not die till forty years later. 3. There can be no reference to the resurrection of Moses, since the fact that Moses died shows that death reigned over him as well as over anybody else. A subsequent resurrection would not alter the fact that death had extended its reign over him, any more than the general resurrection would alter the fact that death has reigned over all mankind. If the resurrection of Moses shows that death did not reign over him, then the final resurrection of all men will show that death never reigned over anybody. That which proves too much, proves nothing. 4. In order to have the expression of any force as indicating the breaking of the reign of death by the resurrection of Moses, it would be necessary to show that up to the time of Moses all men had died; but the case of Enoch entirely destroys that argument. The translation of Enoch was certainly more of a break in the reign of death than was the resurrection of Moses. But the fact is, there has not been a moment since the fall when death did not reign, although some, as Enoch and Elijah, and Moses and the saints at the crucifixion of Christ, have been rescued from its power, as pledges of the time when its reign will be forever broken. The fact that “the dead know not anything,” but sleep, unconscious, in the grave (Eccl. 9:5; Ps. 146:3, 4; 115:17; 88:10-12; Job 10:18-22, etc.), and that fifteen hundred years after his death Moses was seen by Peter, James, and John, is proof enough that Moses was raised from the dead. Jude 9, which speaks of the dispute between Michael (Christ) and the devil over the body of Moses, corroborates this fact. There is not the slightest doubt but that Moses was raised from the dead, but there is no more doubt that Romans 5 contains no reference to such resurrection. Paul and the Revision Committee.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
IN the eighth psalm, one of the most beautiful compositions ever written, occurs this passage, which has become familiar even to those not intimately acquainted with the Bible: "When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor." Verses 3-5. In the New Version the 5th verse reads thus: "For thou hast made him but little lower than God, and crownest him with glory and honor." A religious journal, in noting some changes in familiar texts, puts this text in a group of which it says: "The following changes have perhaps been necessary, but grate sadly against literary associations." For ourselves, we can say that the change grates sadly against Scriptural associations, and we do not believe it to be at all necessary. We give the following reason why we dare disagree with the learned Revision Committee:— In the second chapter of Hebrews, the apostle, in showing how Christ, who had "by inheritance" a more excellent name than the angels, was made on a level with man, quotes the words of the psalmist concerning man, as follows: "But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownest him with glory and honor." Heb. 2:6, 7. Here the Greek word is angelos, the word invariably rendered "angel." There is no question but that the apostle used the word angelos (plural form) in quoting from Ps. 8:5, and the Revision Committee have agreed that it is correctly rendered "angels," since it is so rendered in the New Version. But if "angels" is the proper word to use in quoting from Ps. 8:5, and the authority of an inspired apostle ought certainly to settle that point, why should not the same word be used in the passage itself? By what authority did the revisers use the word "God" in rendering the Hebrew word which Paul translates "angels"? It is true that the Hebrew word in Ps. 8:5 is eloheem, a word that is usually used with reference to a deity, either the true God or a false god, and there is no other place in the Old Testament where it is rendered "angels;" and therefore the revisers doubtless thought that consistency required them to render it "God" in this instance. But we are certain that consistency would require instead that the text should agree with the same text as translated by the inspired writer of the book of Hebrews. In other words, even though the lexicons knew nothing650about such a rendering of eloheem, Heb 2:7 would show that in one instance, at least, it undoubtedly refers to angels. And the Revision Committee, in retaining the word "angels" in Heb. 2:7, while they rejected it in Ps. 8:5, have convicted themselves of inconsistency. Such renderings go a long ways toward making some people doubt whether the New Version is a decided improvement on the Old. At any rate, we do not feel inclined to use it to the exclusion of the Old Version. While we find it very valuable as a commentary, we regard it in that light, and cannot rely upon it with that confidence that we do upon the version commonly used. A translator of the Bible needs, far more than the commentator, to be acquainted with the entire Bible, and thoroughly imbued with its spirit. We very much doubt if it is possible for any body of men to agree upon a version of the Bible that will be superior to King James's version.