been spent, especially in Germany, to make out direct contradictions between the account of the creation in chapter first and the references to it in chapter second. The fruits of a criticism whose darkness has been too often mistaken for depth, have passed under many forms into this country. And while the shallowness of the sources whence they have come have been forgotten, the streams have assumed an apparent magnitude which in reality does not belong to them, by being mixed up with phases of British thought in theology and science. We are told that while chapter first associates the creation of vegetation with the direct creative act of the Almighty, chapter second goes no farther than the recognition of the action of natural law, seen in the mist (v. 6) which watered the ground! In the one it is held we have an earth saturated with moisture, emerging from the womb of ocean; in the other, it was so dry that it required this mist to moisten it! In chapter first man is created male and female; in chapter second the male is formed first, and the female is taken from a part of the male. In all this, it is alleged, there is contradiction! In the former, man is created in the image of God; in the latter, he is made from the ignoble dust! In the one, man is represented as having been made after the beasts; and in the other it is averred that he was made before them; while Eden in the second chapter has a place assigned to it in time anterior to the work of the fifth day! Were ever plain words so wrested from their natural meaning? Was ever historical narrative so tortured that it might declare itself in harmony with the prejudices of its critics? Why all this? The only probable explanation is, that as these early chapters of Genesis contain so many things which bear testimony to the true character of God, fully revealed in the after Scriptures, it is felt that if they can be damaged as historical documents, speedy work might be made with the testimonies which follow to the character of God as "infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth," and to the character of man as fallen, lost naturally to God and all good, guilty in the sight of the Holy One, and deserving "God's wrath and curse." Thus it has ever been. The guilty turn their backs on forgiveness. The diseased refuse the sovereign remedy. But the answer to all this lies in the narrative itself. New elements are introduced in the second chapter, of a higher and more important kind than we meet with in the first. For example, we have the rest of the seventh day, the prototype of the holy Sabbath— the opportunity, in short, for man entering into sympathy with the thoughts of God touching the order, and beauty, and native goodness

of the six days' work. Then in chapter second, verses 16, 17, relations between man and his Maker are plainly implied of a kind as suggestive of the highest condition of spiritual development, to which man in contact with the thoughts of God can obtain, as they were of a wholly new tie between the creature and Creator. Nothing of the kind obtained before. The allusions to creation in chapter second are such as would best give prominence to this relation-the relation of covenant between God and man; moral obligation and responsibility on man's part, the continuance of spiritual blessing and the fulfilment of sovereign voluntary promise on God's part. These references to creation form, as it were, a background for a picture of man acknowledging the privileges of this covenant standing.

GENESIS II.

ND the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil" (ver. 8, 9).

Eden is to be regarded as the general name for a tract of country, in the east of which the garden stood which received our first parents. In the opening verses we have a description of the garden, and then of the land of Eden. The trees of the garden were of three kinds :-(1) Such as were pleasant to the sight; (2) good for food; and (3) symbolic, as set apart for the development and discipline of man's higher spiritual nature. The classification of the trees here brings with it a deeper insight into the character of God than we have yet seen, if we except what is implied in the rest of the seventh day. Thus we have

(1. The tree pleasant to the sight.

2. The tree good for food.

(3. The tree of life.

4. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The twofold nature of man was taken into account in the arrangement. For the body there were the means of gratification and of strength, and for the soul the means of growth and of power. That these latter were provided for through a prohibition, on the one hand, and information, on the other hand, touching a moral state of which man had no experience, would influence the Will and the Emotions. Apart from these considerations, however, and of fuller interest to us in connection with the goodness of God, is the fact that the beautiful here takes precedence of the useful-"Out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the eye." He had endowed man with an intellect fitted for the appreciation of beauty, and he provided the means for his gratification. But this is not all. Why have made this taste for the lovely in the outward world innate-native to the unfallen man? It could scarcely be only to please, though this in itself were good, but he saw how the pleasure would react on the whole moral and intellectual

being. The tree pleasant to the sight still continues with us. God has spread riches of beauty with a lavish hand all around us in his green earth, in tree, and shrub, and tiniest flower even that is trodden under foot by the wayside, or that courts man's admiration in every hedgerow. Their beauty bears on it the simple legend-" Gift of God." The man that accepts that gift will have in reality a far higher pleasure than the devices of art can minister. It is this gift, implied in the tree pleasant to the eye, that makes the efforts of the artist in copying nature so intensely interesting to such as have thought on these things. The effort at imitation-the desire to copy the beauty of nature and to fix it on the canvas or in the stainless marble-bears witness to the existence of an original taste, as well as of objects in nature still fitted, as in Eden, to gratify that taste. Whether in nature or in art, then, we need put no stint on our enjoyment of what God has provided for us "pleasant to the sight."

It were vain to attempt to decide either the nature of the tree of life or of that of knowledge, on any other ground than the information given us of them in the Scriptures. That they were true trees is beyond a doubt. They are classed in plain words with those that were pleasant to the sight and good for food. But by the sovereign arrangement of God they were set apart to a special use-that use being indissolubly connected with the command of God. They were the signs and pledge of the covenant engagement between God and man. This is nearly all we know about them, and it is sufficient to explain how the eating of their fruits could come to be associated with such important spiritual issues. What references are made to the tree of life in other parts of the sacred volume? "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." (Gen. iii. 22-24.) These words, looked at in the light of Gen. ii. 9, point to a power in this tree, while man remained in Eden, to counteract the curse of death which had now fallen upon him. Thus he was driven out. It is not given to man to penetrate the mystery farther; but the purely symbolic aspect of this tree has more light shed on it. "To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God." "In the midst of the street of it

(the Holy Jerusalem), and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits." "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life." (Rev. ii. 7, xxii. 2, 14.) Man forfeited eternal life by sin. That life is restored in Christ, who is described, in the visions of John, as the life in the New Jerusalem-the one and only central source of all blessing. The right to eternity was lost by disobedience, but once more the law of love and eternal life were to meet. Obedience was to be rendered by another that his people might obey in Him-" they do his commandments, and have a right to the tree of life." Now it is that all those passages in which the tree of life is associated with spiritual men, and even with moral duties, are seen to have a very blessed meaning. They tell of lost ground recovered-of the restoration of fallen ones. These hearken to the voice of heavenly wisdom, and she becomes "a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her," and happiness to "every one that retaineth her" (Prov. iii. 18). The result is the influence for good on the whole nature-heart and life. "The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life" (xi. 30). We can thus find traces of Eden lying all around us.

But even more mysterious was the other tree-" the tree of knowledge of good and evil." Man knew true good, yea all good, in knowing his Maker and in loving him. Evil was in the world. Was he to know it also, and, in the knowledge of it, to become truly unworthy of the love of Him who is supremely good? It must ever be a theme of deepest interest for the thoughtful, that the moral corruption of the race -the taint which has influenced all mere humanity-began with an increase of knowledge, because it will suggest to them the yet more deeply interesting theme, that redemption comes to the fallen by an increase of knowledge in an opposite direction-the knowledge of Christ, whom to know is life eternal. Thus the whole question of the fall and of salvation through a substitute, comes up in our first notice of this tree of knowledge. The form in which the allurement to eat came bears testimony to the subtilty of the tempter:-Ye have a Lord over you; but why, when the means are within your reach, should not ye be as gods yourselves? Eat there is no reason why you should abstain, but the contrary. "Your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." "She took of the fruit, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." (Gen. iii. 5, 6.) True, they learned evil-they attained to the knowledge of it, but in doing so they lost the good. Have we, then, in this transaction

VOL. I.

M