It is astonishing to see what influence creeds have upon the interpretation of this book. Good Dr. Gill, a high toned Calvinist, thought that it concerned Christ and the elect only, and for the comfort of the elect, preached one hundred and twentytwo sermons on it; while Dr. A. Clarke, a conscientious Arminian, who was of a widely different opinion, advised ministers, and especially young ministers, never to meddle with it, in the way of preaching. Amidst this conflict of opinion, supported as each is, by the highest names for piety and talents, it is extremely difficult to decide on the right.

That Solomon was the author of this poem, is affirmed by the concurrent testimony of both the Jewish and Christian churches. He is also mentioned as its author in the poem itself, (ver. 1); and the several allusions to his works and character, fix it indubitably to the period of his reign. That it is an inspired composition has been inferred from its finding a place in the Hebrew canon, and its translation into the Septuagint version.

But in opposition to this opinion, Whiston, the translator of Josephus, has endeavored to disprove its divine authority from a passage in which that Jewish writer gives an account of the divisions of their books, being twenty-two in number, instead of twenty-four, as at present. His words are, •We have only twenty-two books which are deservedly believed to be of divine authority, of which five are the laws of Moses. The prophets who were the successors of Moses, have written thirteen. The remaining four contain hymns to God, and docu

ments of life for the use of men. These four seem to be, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes.

Probably the Jews, out of veneration to the author, and from a desire of preserving so striking a model of the marriage union, as well as from the fact that the covenant of God with their fathers was often symbolized by the figure of the marriage union, took the liberty to append it to their sacred books. It does not appear that either Christ or his apostles ever quoted it; and if we are to judge of its inspiration by the tenor of St. Paul's words (2 Tim. iii. 16,) it is difficult to perceive wherein it is "profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, or for instruction in righteousness, &c." unless it be by way of allegory, for the true understanding of which we still want the key of an inspired apostle, or of the Master himself. The fact that the Jews did not suffer their children to read it until they were thirty years of age, and the assertions of Christian ministers, that 'It is impossible that a natural or unconverted man, should understand this book,' if they have any weight in them, seem to say that it should have been bound up with those of the Apocrypha, rather than among those which are esteemed canonical.

LECTURE IV.

ON THE PROPHETICAL BOOKS.

"For prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

"THIS division of the books of the Old Testament is called prophetical, because the subjects thereof are chiefly, though not exclusively, of that charac

ter.

"If we take up the prophetic part of the divine volume, we find that it really distinguishes itself into two parts, which may be called the moral or doctrinal, and the predictive. It is not a series of mere predictions, far from it-it abounds in matter of another kind; the continued strain of moral doctrine, which runs through it; that doctrine which is founded upon a knowledge of God, his attributes and his will, with a sense of man's direct, personal, and responsible relation to Him. Accordingly, the most frequent subjects of the prophets are the laws of God; his supreme dominion; his universal providence; the majesty of his character; spirituality of

his being; and holiness of his nature; together with the obligations of obedience to him, in the particular duties of an inward faith and worship; and of justice and mercy to man; the whole of which duties are enforced by explicit sanctions of reward and punishment. These original principles of piety and morals, overspread the pages of the books of prophecy; they are brought forward-they are inculcated from first to last-they are often the subject when nothing future is in question; they are constantly interwoven with the predictions; they are either the very thing propounded, or connected with it; andall the way they are impressed with a distinctness and energy of instruction, which show that it was. none of the secondary ends of the prophet's mission to be the teacher of righteousness; inasmuch that if we except the Gospel itself, there can no where be shown so much of luminous and decisive information concerning the unity, providence, mercy, and moral government of God, and man's duty founded upon His will, as is to be gathered from the prophetic volume.

"It may further be remarked, that this moral revelation, made by the succession of prophets, holds an intermediate place between the law of Moses and the Gospel itself. It is a step in progress beyond the law, in respect of the greater distinctness and fulness of some of its doctrines and precepts; it is a more perfect exposition of the principles of personal holiness and virtue; its sanctions have less of an exclusive reference to temporal promises, and incline more to evangelical; the ritual of the law begins to be discountenanced by it; the superior

value of the moral commandment to be enforced and altogether it bears a more spiritual and a more instructive character, than the original law given by Moses. In a word, there is in the prophets a more luminous rule of faith, than in the primary law; and therefore God's moral revelation was progressive. It is more perfect in the prophets than in the law; more perfect in the gospel than in either.

"The prophets, in addition to their communication of doctrine and delivering of predictions, had another and a practical office to discharge, as pastors and ministerial monitors of the people of God. To show the house of Jacob their transgressions, and the people of Israel their sins, was a part of the commission they received. Hence their work to admonish and reprove; to arraign for every ruling sin, to blow the trumpet to repentance, and shake the terrors of the divine judgments over a guilty land. Often did they bear the message of consolation or pardon; rarely, if ever, of public approbation and praise. The integrity and fortitude with which they acquitted themselves of this charge, is attested by impartial history, which recites the death and martyrdom which some of them endured. But it lives also in their own writings; not in the praise of their sincerity and zeal, but in the faithful record of the expostulations and reproofs which they delivered in the face of idolatrous or oppressive kings, a degenerate priesthood, and a corrupt and idolatrous people. Great was the fidelity and great the boldness of the prophets,' is their just panegyric. But in this service they betray none of the spirit of turbulent and fanatical agitators, men who step out