In our image. "The body connects us with the external universe; the soul with God. The flesh is his production; the spirit his image; and as the former separates us from him by a dissimilarity of nature, so the latter assimilates us to him, by the possession of principles and laws congenial with his own:" Robert Hall's Works; and see Col. iii, 10.

29. The seed and fruit, as food for man; the green herb for beasts. "Hence, some learned men have inferred that before the deluge, mankind were interdicted from flesh-eating, not because it was cruel, or injurious to the human constitution, but because it was necessary animals should be multiplied, before mankind could use them for food, since it is probable only a pair of each species was created. I can assent to this opinion, only so far as the abode in paradise is concerned, for immediately after the fall, we have clear indications of the slaying of animals in the sacrifices of Abel, and in chap. 7, animals are divided into clean and unclean."-Dathe.

CHAP. II.

3. And God blessed the seventh day. To bless, is to distinguish with peculiar favour. God wished it to be an auspicious, happy day, marked and sacred above the rest; and he honoured it with peculiar distinction and favour.— Mercer, as quoted by Rosen.

use.

And sanctified it. To sanctify, is to separate for a holy The reason given for making the day holy, is coeval with it, and therefore must date from it: Exod. xx, 11. If God sanctified the day, because he rested in it, he surely sanctified it, when he rested. Dathe, in his note on this verse, says: "I cannot here pass over in silence, the question agitated amongst the most learned men, both in ancient and modern times, whether Moses adds these words to explain the reason of the law [afterwards] given to the Israelites concerning the celebration of the sabbath, or whether they are a part of that historic record, in which it is narrated, that God in the beginning established a law concerning the

sabbath?" "I have no hesitation," he says, "in agreeing with those who maintain the latter opinion; for if Moses had only wished to commend to the Israelites the law promulgated by himself, he would not have joined his own words to the rest by a conjunction copulative, so that they should unite with the rest of the narration; but he would have distinguished them by the particle therefore or wherefore, as in verse 24, and Exod. xx, 11, treating of this very subject. Not less weighty appears to me that argument which Ikenius especially urges; viz. that that shorter period of seven days, which is called by the name of weekly or seventh, was observed even in the most ancient times; of which striking vestiges appear, not only amongst other nations, but even in the sacred history, see Gen. xxix, 27, 28; vii, 4, 10; viii, 10, 12: and it cannot be understood why this cycle should have been observed, unless, for some peculiar reason, the seventh day was distinguished from that which followed it. It cannot be said that the days were numbered successively so far as the seventh, and that at the seventh the reckoning finished; for, (besides that no just reason can be given why the first men made that cycle, or when and on what occasion it first began,) it can hardly be imagined, especially in that rude age of the world, in what way, from the simple reckoning of the days in succession, the seventh should have been so exactly counted out, and separated from all the rest, as that no confusion should ever have arisen. On the other hand, if it be admitted that for some cause, the seventh day was held sacred above the others, and appointed for certain religious exercises, mistake could be easily avoided. This is what Ikenius says. Lastly, it appears to me a very forced construction to apply the passage, Exod. xvi, 23, to the first institution of the Mosaic sabbath, for there is nothing taught therein, which relates to the celebration of the sabbath, but the people are admonished, that on that day, as a day already well known, no manna should be gathered. I do not however mean to assert, that the sabbath which the first men or patriarchs, as they are called, and their posterity observed, was altogether the same as the Mosaic sabbath. The rites which Moses prescribes, to be observed on this day, by the Israelites, teach plainly that it had not been formerly so observed by them; but they do not prove that which our opponents would have them, that this day had been alto

gether undistinguished from the rest; since it might have. been so by certain religious exercises, or forms of worship; even though that rest, or abstinence from labour, which was a primary law of the Mosaic sabbath, was not maintained in the ancient solemnization of the seventh day. This limitation being admitted, all those things may be conceded to Spencer, by which he so prolixly maintains, that the sabbath was prescribed by God to the Israelites, that, by its observance, they might be separated from other nations. For, notwithstanding this, there might have been a certain consecration of the seventh day (whatever it was) handed down to them from their ancestors."-Dathe.

4. From the various and striking differences of style, and the repetition, in a different form, of the history of the creation, with the addition of new and more minute particulars, which appear in the remainder of this and the whole of the next chapter, many commentators are of opinion, that Moses adopted two ancient traditionary accounts of the creation, and gave to them the sanction of his inspired authority. "Eichhorn, upon grounds solely philological, seems to have satisfactorily proved, what Astruc had conjectured in the last century, that the book of Genesis is composed of several distinct documents, which Moses has plainly incorporated into his work, clearly distinguishable, not only by their definite and complete form, but by the use of peculiar words, as, for instance, the word Jehovah, which is totally absent from one, and invariably found in another. Thus, the first chapter, where we are told that God created man, male and female, without giving the details of this creation, always calls the Almighty by the name Elohim, or simply, God. But the fourth verse of the second chapter begins, manifestly, a new narrative or document, having a particular title; These are the generations of the heavens and the earth; in other words, this is the history of the creation of heaven and earth, entering into the details of paradise and man's creation, and distinguishable throughout by the constant use of the title Jehovah, till its end with the fourth chapter. In the fifth, we have the return of the same document given in the first, or else another, in which Jehovah is not used, and where again, man is said to have been created, male and female:" Wiseman's Lectures on the Connexion between Science and Revealed Religion: Lect. 3rd, pp. 149, 150.

The three prior verses of this chapter, seem more properly to belong to the former; and with this verse begins that portion of the Mosaic history of the creation, which, extending to the close of the third chapter, presents us, first, with a brief description of the earth as created by God, then, more fully concerning the formation of man; the abode prepared for him by God in paradise; the forbidden fruit; the creation of woman; and the fall of our first parents. In this chapter, we have a view of the origin of plants, animals, and men; in what way (as it were) they were created; Jehovah, Elohim (which sacred name is first used ver. 4) is declared to be the Author of all things, calling into action nevertheless, those natural causes, which he rendered subservient to his purposes. Hence, the Lord is said to have sent down a rain, which refreshed the dry or fruitless earth, (thenceforth to be tilled by man,) and which rendered it fit for bearing fruit. Jehovah alone is declared to be the Creator of man and animals, (7, 19) making use, nevertheless, of earth, as a material in their formation: thus intimating the return of the human body to the dust, after death: See the close of Dathe's note on ver. 5.

5, 6. And there was as yet no shrub on the field; and no herbs were grown, for the Lord Jehovah had not caused it to rain; and there were no men there to till it; but clouds ascended, and watered the whole face of the land.Michaelis. These verses seem to refer to what took place, before the arrangement of the earth in its present form.— A description of its rude state before God had created plants, animals, and man.

As, in the course of the history of the creation of the world in six days, Moses had summarily mentioned that plants were brought forth on the third day; proceeding now to the most ancient history of the earth, and of man, he explains more accurately in what way plants were created, and he shews in this verse, (6) that when God first created the heavens and the earth, plants did not at the same time stand out of the dry ground; (i, 9, 10) and although this appears in the former narration, yet he clearly explains it here, that he may pass to what follows.-Rosen.

8. Eden was that region which is now called Armenia, Ghilan, Daila, and Chorassan, and extends from the Euphrates and Tigris to the Araxes and Oxus.-Michaelis.

9. In this garden the Lord God made to grow trees of every kind, as well pleasant to the sight, as good for food, and, amongst these, the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.-Dathe's Version. The tree of life was doubtless endowed with the power of preserving human life see ch. iii, 22. The tree of knowledge of good and evil many suppose to have been noxious in its nature, and that its fruit was poisonous and destructive to human life; but Ernesti adduces the following reasons in refutation of this opinion; first, because it is opposed to the express words of this verse, in which it is said that God planted none but good trees in this garden, which ought to be understood of this tree, and of the tree of life, as well as of the other trees of this garden; second, because the particle Vau ought to be translated amongst these, as in other places, (ver. 19) and further, because this hypothesis does away with the judgment of the divine law, in respect to this precept. Nor does there seem any necessity for this opinion-for that corruption of the mind and body of man which followed the violation of this law, might have fallen upon both, from the divine denunciation alone, although the fruit of the forbidden tree was not in itself pernicious. Nor can I agree with those who maintain that God did not assign this name to this tree, because men had not then the knowledge of good and evil, all things being good; but that afterwards men gave it this name, because of the effect which the eating of the forbidden fruit had upon them, for to me the contrary is proved, by the words of the serpent to the woman, and still more by the doubts of the woman herself, which clearly refer to the name of this tree: see ch. iii. God might also give to man in his original state, some idea, although imperfect, of evil, in the same manner as he did of death.-Dathe.

10-14. "Of the numerous authors who have written concerning the site of paradise, I shall mention only Reland, who has a most excellent Dissertation upon it. He thinks the river Pison the same as that called by the Greeks and ancient geographers Phasis. That the land of Havilah is that part of Scythia called Colchis, the productions which are attributed by Moses to Havilah, agreeing well with Colchis; viz. gold and precious stones, the names of which, he says, are however very doubtful. Reland thinks that