to God, and a desire to obey his will: so much only of one particular evil habit is avoided as would be inconsistent with a full indulgence in another. But it was not thus in the case of Moses. As it respects the present life, he had all to lose, and nothing to gain. He gave up affluence, and power, and worldly honour; he refused to be called the son of a king's daughter, and renounced the splendours and dignities attached to that exalted station: and this without any earthly equivalent; nay, with the certain prospect of suffering affliction with a despised and outcast people; of becoming a captive among cap tives, a slave among slaves. Now, had this been forced upon him by violence, we might not so much have wondered at his endeavouring to reconcile his mind to his lot, and for his own sake bearing with patience a burden which he found he could not throw off. But what is truly remarkable in his his tory is, that this exchange was a matter of deliberate choice; it was made when he came to years of mature understanding; it was made also with a full knowledge both of the sacrifices he must undergo and the evils he must incur by making it. During his childhood and youth, every effort had probably been used to alienate him from the faith of his fathers, and to teach him the superstitions of Egypt; in all the wisdom of which, including, without doubt, especially the boasted learning of its idolatrous religion, he was carefully educated. But now he had arrived at an age when he must choose between true and false religion; between the service of God and the service of the world; between the reproach of Christ and the pleasures of Egypt: and this choice was to be made under circumstances remarkably calculated to lead him astray from the only right path. It was perhaps expected of him, as a necessary condition to his full adoption into Pharaoh's family and succeeding to his crown, that he should now explicitly declare, both before the Egyptians and the Israelites, whether he would worship the God of his fathers or the idols of the land in which he dwelt. No compromise could be allowed: he must choose whom he would serve ; and, having made his choice, must prepare for all the good or evil which might accompany it. Thus circumstanced, he came boldly forward, and selected a lot in which he knew affliction and reproach awaited him, in preference to all the worldly pleasures which might have been his portion. In the language of our Christian vows, he "renounced the devil and all his works, the pomps and vanities of this wicked world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh;" he "believed all the articles of the faith," so far as then clearly revealed, and, as the Apostle informs us in the text, with an especial reference to Christ, the promised Messiah; and he made it his studious desire" to keep God's holy will and commandments, and to walk in the same all the days of his life." 2. But we are to inquire, secondly, what were the reasons which influenced his choice. It was not that he was indifferent to pain or pleasure; that he was not open to the natural temptations arising from worldly advantages; or that he courted affliction and reproach for their own sake. If what he gave up had been really good, and what he received in exchange only evil, his conduct would have been absurd and irrational. But in forming a due estimate of both, he found that the opposite was the fact; that the exchange, ill advised as it might appear to a careless and ungodly world, was in truth infinitely to his advantage. And why so? Because "he esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt;" he considered it a better portion" to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;" and this, because "he had respect to the recompence of the reward." Contrasting, like the Apostle Paul, the things which are seen with the things which are not seen, he inferred the infinite superiority of the latter over the former, from the consideration that these are temporal, but those eternal. Knowing that the time of our sojourning upon earth is short, he arrived practically at the conclusion of the same Apostle; "It remaineth, that they that have wives be as though they had none; and they that weep as though they wept not; and they that rejoice as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy as though they possessed not; and they that use this world as not abusing it; for the fashion of this world passeth away." Did he make sacrifices? These very sacrifices were eventually gain; for he sacrificed those snares and temptations and corrupt desires which might have proved the ruin of his soul. Did he incur affliction and reproach for the cause of Christ? This was gain also: for, in the first place, the burden which he bore was truly honourable; he suffered not as an evil-doer, but in the best of causes-he was persecuted for righteousness sake; and of such our Lord has said, "Blessed are ye when men shall hate you, and shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake." Like the Apostles, therefore, he might well "rejoice that he was counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Christ." "If ye be reproached," says St. Peter, "for the name of Christ, happy are ye, for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you." And, again, as the afflictions which he incurred for his piety were truly honourable, so also were they conducive to his spiritual benefit; for "we glory in tribulations," says St. Paul, because "tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope." Though "no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous, neverthe less afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness to them which are exercised thereby." Again; he might the more willingly welcome the afflictions which should befal him, considering how greatly they would be lightened by the testimony of a good conscience, the approbation of God, and the supporting influences of the Holy Spirit." As the sufferings of Christ abound in us," says the Apostle, "so our consolation also aboundeth by Christ." Another reason for his preference was, as already intimated, the shortlived nature of worldly troubles and worldly joys. The pleasures of sin, he knew were but for a season;" they would soon be over, and leave behind them for ever a sting that cannot be extracted, a worm that never dies. He knew, also, that the reproach and afflictions which he should suffer were equally transient; but not so "the recompence of the reward;" that was not only unspeakably great in value, but eternal in duration. Like the Apostle, he had learned that the afflictions which "the people of God" may be called upon to endure for the cause of their Saviour are but light and momentary, while they work out "a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." Even should he fall a martyr in the cause of truth and for the testimony of his conscience, he would have no reason in the end to regret his choice; for the recom pence of the reward, a crown eternal of glory in the heavens, would far overbalance every earthly loss or suffering. "Whosoever," said our Saviour, "shall lose his life for my sake and the Gospel's, shall save it;" for "there is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake and the Gospel's, but he shall receive a hundred-fold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions, and in the world to come life eternal." If we suffer with Christ-that is for Christ and like Christ, in his cause and with his spirit -we shall reign with him; if we unite ourselves to "the people of God"—that is, to the faithful in Christ Jesus in the season of their earthly affliction, we shall partake for ever of their reward in that blessed world "where the wicked cease from troubling and the weary are at rest." These powerful reasons, if seriously reflected upon, will shew that there was ample cause for the choice which Moses made. But still it may be asked, Why then is it, if these things be so, that the great majority of mankind do not follow his example? Why do not all, to whom the record of the will of God is sent, make it the constant rule of their life? Why do they not prefer light to darkness, eternity to time, and heaven to hell? Why, when they know that the end of their present pursuits is death, but that the gift of God is everlasting life, do they not make a right choice between the service of the world and the service of their Creator? Why, when they cannot deny that the time of their probation upon earth is short and uncertain, are they content to build all their hopes upon a sandy foundation instead of choosing that better portion which can never be taken from them? Why do they not gladly lay hold of the hope set before them in the Gospel? Why do they not repair to a crucified Saviour for the pardon of their sins, and devote themselves to his blessed service? Have they more to give up, or more to endure, than had Moses? or do they seriously think that the glories of heaven are of little value; and that the passing events of the present scene are all that deserve their consideration as rational, accountable, and immortal beings? 3. In replying to these questions we arrive at our third point of inquiry-namely, as to the principle which influenced Moses in coming to this decision and adhering to it. The Apostle informs us that this principle was "faith." He beCHRIST. OBSERV. No. 309. lieved what he professed, and his belief shewed itself practically in his conduct. Thousands will admit, in words, all that has been stated respecting the value and necessity of religion, who do not thus " believe with the heart unto righteousness." They have not brought nigh to their minds, by serious reflection, the importance of the stake at issue. The blindness of their understandings, and their love of the present evil world, prevent their truly estimating the value of that recompence of reward which God has promised to all who love and obey him. They do not practically believe that reward to be so valuable or desirable as the Bible describes it to be; or, at least, there are other things which in their heart they love better. Their affections are so widely alienated from God, that they do not really esteem the service of God, or the reproach of Christ, to be greater riches than any earthly acquisition. In a word, they have not that firm and abiding persuasion, respecting those things which God has declared in his word, which the Apostle is describing in the chapter from which our text is taken. Their professed faith has never become to them, according to the definition already cited, "the substance of things hoped for, or the evidence of things not seen: it has never brought the value of the soul, or the rewards of eternity, so powerfully before them, as to eclipse for ever the vanities and pursuits of a sinful and unsatisfying world. They have not the principle which caused Enoch to "walk with God," and "to please him ; which led Noah, believing the certainty, of the threatened judgment, to take shelter in the appointed ark; which made Abraham, in obedience to the Divine command, come out from a sinful land, and, in dependence upon the promise of God, seek a better country, even a heavenly; which induced him to perform the command of God even under the most painful circum 3 Z stances, knowing that, sooner than the promise of God should be broken, his son Isaac should be miraculously raised from the dead; which caused Moses to make the choice in our text; and which actuated all the other" cloud of witnesses," the triumphs of whose faith are recorded in the chapter before us. Let, then, our earnest prayer be, that God would strengthen our faith; that, truly believing what he has revealed-believing our own sinfulness, our need of salvation, the infinite mercy of God in Christ, the necessity of true conversion of heart to Him through the influences of the Holy Spirit, the shortness of time, the vanity of the world, the unspeakable importance of eternity, the joys of heaven, and the terrors of hell-we may lay these things to heart, and be influenced by them to " give diligence to make our calling and election sure." Animated by this holy principle, let us "lay aside every weight" and "the sin which doth so easily beset us;" and let us 66 run with patience the race that is set before us," incited, not only by mortal examples, but "looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith; who, for the joy that was set before him, endured (for us) the cross, despising the shame, and is now set down at the right hand of the Majesty on high," where "he ever liveth to make intercession for us;" pitying our infirmities, supporting us under our afflictions, pardoning our offences, justifying us by his merits, and cleansing us by his blood. Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. THE more critically the occasional ambiguities, or even apparent contradictions, of Scripture are examined, the more triumphant appears the argument for the Divine authority of that inestimable volume. There are very few discrepancies, even in names, dates, or the minute cir cumstances of events, which are not capable of being satisfactorily reconciled to the understanding of every intelligent and candid critic. There is, however, some danger of allowing the laudable wish of solving apparent difficulties to betray the student into rash criticisms, the ultimate application of which to the sacred canon would be far more injurious than the supposed difficulties which they were adduced to remove. The German school of theology furnishes direful proof of this; and our own biblical literature is not wholly free from a similar fault. Among other hypotheses for explaining certain passages of the New Testament, the application of the principle maintained in the learned, but most unsound and injudicious, publication entitled Pa læoromaica, has of late been occa sionally resorted to. (See an account of Palæoromaica in the Christian Observer for 1823, p. 74.) At a late meeting of the Royal Society of Literature, Mr. Granville Penn endeavoured, on the leading principle maintained in that work, to reconcile Acts i. 18 with Matt. xxvii. 5. His paper was entitled, "Indication of an insititious Latin term in the Hellenistic Greek, inveterately mistaken for a genuine Greek word." The word referred to is exakŋoɛ, which occurs in St. Peter's account of the suicide of Judas, in the Acts of the Apostles: Πρηνης γενόμενος ἐλακησε μέσος: Eng. Trans. " falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst. In St. Matthew's Gospel, the word used to express the same act is απήγξατο, "he hanged himself." Mr. Penn contends, that eλakŋoɛ is not, as has generally been supposed, derived from the same theme as lake, ελakɛ, λakety, found, in classical writers, with the signification of sonare, sonitum dare, cum strepitu rumpi; but that it is an inflection of Aakεw-a rendering, in Greek letters, of the Latin verb laqueo, to "halter," or ensnare; used, like many Latin verbs, in the active voice, but with a passive or reflective sense -that is, laqueatus est, or laqueavit se. And, by further adverting to the peculiar manner in which the traitor appears to have accomplished his death-namely, by throwing himself headlong from a great height, and being suddenly caught midway (μerds) in the noose-he considers that the periphrastic language of St. Peter, and the single expression of St. Matthew, may be reconciled, as identically descriptive of the same act. Such an amalgamation of a Latin into a Greek word seems highly improbable; nor is it necessary for reconciling the passages, which, in truth, exhibit no direct discrepancy. The solution offered by the majority of commentators is surely sufficient: he suspended himself; but, the support failing, or the body becoming decomposed, he was precipitated to the ground, and "burst asunder in the midst." Why, with so easy a solution, adopt an hypothesis the bearing of which is to maintain that the original New Testament was written, not in Greek, but Latin?-an absurdity to which the ingenious author of Palæoromaica has happily made few converts. A. M. T'othe Editorofthe Christian Observer. Ir there is any feeling chiefly predominant in the soul of a true Christian, it is a sense of his own sin and misery in the sight of God; and the impression of this will ever be so strong, where there is true tenderness of conscience, that the most holy man will not think inappropriate to himself the confession of the Apostle, "I am the chief of sinners." Dr. Johnson, on his death-bed, most truly and scripturally remarked, in reference to himself, when his friend Sir J. Hawkins would have urged him to rely on his own merits, and represented to him the excellence of his writings and the morality of his life: "Sir, every man knows his own sins, and, what grace he has resisted; but to those of others, and the circumstances under which they were committed, he is a stranger. He is therefore to look upon himself as the greatest sinner that he knows of;" adding, with much earnestness, "Shall I, who have been a teacher of others, be myself a cast-away?"-"The Apostle Paul," justly remarks Dr. Whitby, who will not be accused of Calvinistic propensities, "does not say, I was the chief of sinners, but, I am; because, even when sin is pardoned, we ought to have the prospect of it still before our eyes, to keep us humble, and sensible of the great grace of God towards us." In this sentiment every sincere Christian will assuredly concur. I have been led to the above remarks by perusing, in the American edition of Bishop Mant and Dr. D'Oyly's Bible, a most singular and exceptionable comment, as it appears to me, of Dr. Waterland's upon the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. If any passage of the word of God more forcibly than another prohibits selfflattering comparisons between ourselves and others, it is surely this striking parable; and Waterland himself, as quoted by Bishop Mant and Dr. D'Oyly, justly remarks on it: "What right had he to come before God with accusations in his mouth against other men; perhaps injurious and false, most certainly foreign and impertinent? The sins or failings of other men were no concern of his in his prayers: but self-accusation, or self-humiliation, should rather have come from him. in addressing an offended God. He dwelt only on his own imaginary perfections, and threw a veil over his sins. His self-flattery prompted him to magnify his own services, taking a false estimate of himself from an ill-natured comparison, which could serve only to |