And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sab-, bath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you, to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade; and it did not stink, (as it had done before, when some of them left it till the morning,) neither was there any worm therein. And Moses said, Eat that today; for to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord; to-day ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days: abide ye every man in his place: let no man go out of his place en the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day.'

"From this passage Dr. Paley infers that the Sabbath was first instituted in the wilderness; but to preclude the possibility of misrepresenting his argument, I will quote his own words. Now, in my opinion, the transaction in the wilderness above recited, was the first actual institution of the Sabbath. For if the Sabbath had been instituted at the time of the creation, as the words in Genesis may seem at first sight to import; and if it had been observed all along from that time to the departure of the Jews out of Egypt, a period of about two thousand five hundred years; it appears unaccountable that no mention of it, no occasion of even the obscurest allusion to it, should occur, either in the general history of the world before the call of Abraham, which contains, we admit, only a few memoirs of its early ages, and those extremely abridged; or, which is more to be wondered at, in that of the lives of the first three Jewish patriarchs, which, in many parts of the account, is sufficiently circumstantial and domestie. Nor is there, in the passage above quoted from the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, any intimation that the Sabbath, when appointed to be observed, was only the revival of an ancient insti

tution, which had been neglected, forgotten, or suspended; nor is any such neglect imputed either to the inhabitauts of the old world, or to any part of the family of Noah; nor, lastly, is any permission recorded to dispense with the institution during the captivity of the Jews in Egypt, or on any other public emergency."

"As to the first part of this reasoning, if it were granted that in the history of the patriarchal ages no mention is made of the Sabbath, nor even the obscurest allusion to it, it would be unfair to conclude that it was not appointed previous to the departure of the children of Israel from Egypt. If instituted at the creation, the memory of it might have been forgotten in the lapse of time, and the growing corruption of the world; or, what is more probable, it might have been observed by the patriarchs, though no mention is made of it in the narrative of their. lives, which, however circumstantial in some particulars, is, upon the whole, very brief and compendious. There are omissions in the sacred history much more extraordinary. Excepting Jacob's supplication at Bethel, scarcely a single allusion to prayer is to be found in all the Pentateuch; yet, considering the eminent piety of the worthies recorded in it, we cannot doubt the frequency of their devotional exercises. Circumcision being the sign of God's covenant with Abraham, was beyond all question punctually observed by the Israelites, yet, from their settlement in Canaan, no particular instance is recorded of it till the circumcision of Christ, comprehending a period of about 1500 years. No express mention of the Sabbath occurs in the books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the first and second of Samuel, or the first of Kings, though it was doubtless regularly observed all the time included in these histories. In the second book of Kings, and the first and second of Chronicles, it is mentioned only twelve times, aud some of them are merely repetitions of the same instance. If the Sabbath is so seldom spoken of in this long histo rical series, it can be nothing wonderful if it should not be mentioned in the summary account of the patriarchal ages.

"But though the Sabbath is not expressly mentioned in the history of the ante-diluvian and patriarchal ages, the observance of it seems to be intimated by the division of time into weeks. In relating the catastrophe of the flood, the historian informs us, that Noah, at the end of forty days, opened the win

trary, however, seems the store natural inference from the narrative. It is mentioned exactly in the way an historian would, who had occasion to speak of a well-known institutions For instance, when the people were astonished at the double supply of manna on the sixth day, Moses observes, This is strat which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; which, as far as we know, was never said previously to this transaction, but at the close of the creation. This surely is the language of a man referring to a matter with which the people were already acquainted, and recalling it to their remembrance. In the 5th verse, God promises on the sixth day twice as much as they gather daily. For this no reason is given, which seems to imply that it was already known to the children of Israel. Such a promise without some cause being assigned for so extraordinary a circumstance would have been strange indeed; and if the reason had been, that the seventh day was now for the first time to be appointed a festival, in which no work was to be done, would pot the author have stated this circumstance? Again, it is said, "Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none:' and, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days.' Here the Sabbath is spoken of as an ordinance with which the people were familiar. A double quantity of manna was given on the sixth day, because the following day, as they well knew, was the Sabbath, in which God rested from his work, and which was to be kept as a day of rest, and holy to the Lord. It is likewise mentioned incidentally, as it were, in the recital of the miraculous supply of manna, without any notice of its being enjoined upon that occasion for the first time, which would be a very surprising circumstance had it been the original establishment of the Sabbath. In short, the entire phrase ology in the account of this remark able transaction accords with the sup position, and with it alone, that the Sabbath had been long established, and was well known to the Israelites..

"That no neglect of the sabbath is imputed either to the inhabitants of the old world, or to any part of the family of Noah,' is very true; but, so far from there being any proof of such negligence, there is, on the contrary, as we have seen, much reason for be lieving that it was duly observed by

the pious Sethites of the old world, and, after the deluge, by the virtuous line of Shem. True, likewise, it is, that there is not any permission recorded to dispense with the institution during the captivity of the Jews in Egypt, or on any other public emergency. But where is the evidence that such a permission would be consistent with the divine wisdom? And if not, none such would either be given or recorded. At any rate, it is difficult to see how the silence of Scripture concerning such a circumstance can furnish an argument in vindication of the opinion, that the sabbath was first appointed in the wilderness. To allege it for this purpose, is just as inconclusive as it would be to argue, that the sabbath was instituted subsequent to the return of the Jews from Babylonia, because neither the observance of it, nor any permission to dispense with it during the captivity, is recorded in Scripture.

"The passage in the second chapter of Genesis is next adduced by Dr. Paley, and he pronounces it not inconsistent with his opinion; for as the seventh day was erected into a sabbath, on account of God's resting upon that day from the work of creation, it was natural enough in the historian, when he had related the history of the creation, and of God's ceasing from it on the seventh day, to add," and God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that on it he had rested from all his work which God created and made;" although the blessing and sanctification, i.e. the religious distinction and appropriation of that day, were not actually made till many ages afterwards. The words do not assert, that God then "blessed" and "sanctified" the seventh day, but that he blessed and sanctified it for that reason; and if any ask, why the sabbath, or sanctification of the seventh day, was then mentioned, if it were not then appointed, the auswer is at hand: the order of connexion, and not of time, introduced the mention of the sabbath, in the history of the subject which it was ordained to commeinorate.'

"That the Hebrew historian, in the passage here referred to, uses a prolepsis or anticipation, and alludes to the Mosaical institution of the sabbath, is maintained by some of the ancient Fathers, by Waehner, Heidegger, Beausobre, by Le Clerc, Roseumuller, Geddes, Dawsou, and other commentators, and by the general stream of those writers who regard the sabbath as pe.. culiar to the Jews. Yet this opinion is built upon the assumption, that the

book of Genesis was not written till after the giving of the law, which may be the fact, but of which most unquestionably there is no proof. But waiving this consideration, it is scarcely possible to conceive a greater violence to the sacred text, than is offered by this interpretation. It attributes to the iuspired author the absurd assertion, that God rested on the seventh day from all his works which he had made, and THEREFORE about 2500 years after, God blessed and sanctified the seventh day. It may as well be imagined that God had finished his work on the seventh day, but rested on some other seventh day, as that he rested the day following the work of creation, and afterwards blessed and sanctified another. Not the slightest evidence appears for believing that Moses followed the order of counexion, and not of time,' for no reasonable motive can be assigned for then introducing the mention of it, if it was not then appointed. The design of the sacred historian clearly is, to give a faithful account of the origin of the world; and both the resting on the seventh day and the blessing it, have too close a connexion to be separated: if the one took place immediately after the work of creation was concluded, so did the other. To the account of the produc tion of the universe, the whole narrative is confined; there is no intimation of subsequent events, nor the most distant allusion to Jewish ceremonies; and it would be most astonishing if the writer deserted his grand object to mention one of the Hebrew ordinances which was not appointed till ages alterwards.

"But according to Dr. Geddes, the opinion of a prolepsis derives some confirmation from the original Hebrew, which he renders, on the sixth day, God completed all the work which he had to do; and on the SEVENTH day, ceased from doing any of his works. God, therefore, blessed the seventh day, and made it holy, because on it he ceased from all his works, which he had ordained to do.' This version, he says, is in the supposition that the writer refers to the Jewish sabbath:' of course it was designedly adapted to an hypothesis; but, notwithstanding this suspicious circumstance, it is not easy to determine how it differs in sense from the received translation, as it leaves the question entirely undecided when this blessing and sanctification took place. The proposed version, however, is opposed by those in the Polyglott, and by the generality of

translators, who render the particle vau, at the beginning of the third verse, as a copulative, not as an illative; and it is surprising how a sound Hebrew scho lar can translate it otherwise. In short, natural than the proleptical interpreta tion; and if we add, that it rests upon the unproved assumption, that the record in question was written after the delivery of the law, it must appear so devoid of critical support, as not to require a moment's hesitation in rejecting it." (pp. 32-51.)

nothing can be more violent and un

This extract will present a specimen of the author's manuer. The main arguments of those who deny the institution of the Sabbath, at the

creation of the world, are satisfac torily answered; and for the minor arguments and criticisms we must re fer to the work itself. A great point is undoubtedly gained by establishing, that the institution of the Sabbath is, historically narrated in Genesis; for. it follows from thence, that it is law, not peculiar to the Jews, but an institution designed for all men. God blessed it, and sanctified it, not certainly for himself, but for his creatures; that it might be a day of blessing to them, and be set apart, not only from unholy but common (To be continued.)

uses.

A short History of the Church of Christ, from the close of the Sacred Narrative to our own Times. Designed for the use of Schools, or of those Persons to whom the size of the Church History of the late Mr. Milner,should that valuable Work ever be completed,-would be an objection. By the Rev. John Fry, B.A.., late of the University of Oxford. 8vo. pp. 614.—An epitome of Ecclesiastical History, from the Apostolic times to the present day, drawn up in the spirit of Christian truth and charity, and adapted to the use of young persons, and of private individuals who have not sufficient leisure for the perusal of voluminous publications, has long been regarded as a desideratum in English literature. Independent of the merit of being a substitute in such cases for a larger work, a good epitome forms a suitable introduction to any study, and especially to that of Ecclesiastical History, which is at once copious, intricate, and of perplexing multifariousness. Several abridgments already exist in our language, and one of them adopts the same leading principles as those of our author, in searching for the true as well as the external Church in every age, and trying the body of professing Christians by this rule, Circumcision is nothing, neither uncircumcision,

but a new creature." Had Mr. Fry displayed the requisite diligence, fidelity, and candour, in the execution of the task which he has undertaken, we should have felt great pleasure in recommending his volume to our readers; but instead of deducing his facts from original authorities, as we presume every creditable historian ought to do, his references are principally made to the compilations of preceding writers; and his attachment to the peculiarities of Calvinian theology is too strong to allow him to do justice to the principles and character of those Christians who differ in their sentiments from the Genevan Reformer. Like Milner, he makes an ineffectual attempt to carry up the peculiarities of Calvinism to the ancient periods of the Church, and to claim the authority of early antiquity for that great doctrinal corrup tion of Christianity, which was first effected by Manicheism and Metaphysics,-an attempt that was abandoned as hopeless by Calvin, Beza, and the rigid predestinarians among the early Protestants. But, like Milner, he proves that what are usually called, in modern times, "the doctrines of grace," and which he often seems to take for granted are peculiar to the Calvinistic system, are not less the doctrines of the first centuries, than they are those