ence to the sense of the passage. It is so here, else this verse would have been the last of the former chapter, instead of the first of this.

M. Jaquelot, a French divine, who wrote a hundred and fifty years ago, has made a powerful argument for the divine origin of the Mosaic code, out of the fact that the Jews submitted to so many onerous, and some of them painful rites, such as circumcision, avoiding all contact with what was impure, practicing sundry ablutions, &c., &c. He insists that no people would do this, without an accompaniment, to the command, of the most wonderful displays of divine power. No people would submit to such institutions, if they were not enforced by something more than merely human authority. This is a masterly argument in the hands of M. Jaquelot; and his entire book is full of just such.

This rite had come down from Abraham, who practiced it upon himself, and the male members of his family, by divine command; and was adopted by Moses, acting in the name of Jehovah, and made a part of the Mosaic code. But, during the journey in the Wilderness, it had been neglected, with many other rites, belonging to that system. As some of the laws of Moses had altogether a prospective reference, and were not intended to be observed till the people were settled in Canaan, it seems to have been assumed that others might be deferred till "a more convenient season," without incurring the divine displeasure. The rite of circumcision had been omitted; but the omission is not commended. ordinary cases, it must be performed when the child was eight days old.

The wandering in the Wilderness, till all were consumed that came out of Egypt, was the penalty of cowardice. The experiment of sending spies into the land of Canaan, was adopted at Kadesh, on the borders of the land; and it proved that the people were not yet prepared to go in and enjoy the promise. It required the discipline of privation and war, for a long period, at least

for one generation, to fit them for conquering and possessing the land.

It is generally assumed, that, during the entire forty years, the people were subject to the strict rules laid down at Sinai - that they encamped in the form there described marched in the same order-worshiped at the tabernacle and offered sacrifices, in all respects as the Law given at Horeb prescribed. This supposition involves insuperable difficulties; and as nothing is said to sustain it, it ought to be relinquished.

Many of the objections to the historical accuracy of the Pentateuch, urged by Bishop Colenso, are based on this unwarranted supposition. Give this up, and they vanish like the early dew before the advancing heat of the morning. It should be observed, that of the forty years in the wilderness, we have no history of thirty-eight years of the time. It is plain, therefore, that what he shows to have been impossible, for a period of forty years, may not have been impossible, for a year, at the beginning, and another year at the close of that period. Sharp knives. "Rather knives of stone. Probably it was unlawful to use metal of any kind. in this religious rite; and indeed this seems likely from the circumstance of Zipporah, Ex. iv. 25, taking a sharp stone and circumcising her son; and we find from the most ancient and authentic accounts, that the Egyptians considered it unlawful or profane to use any kind of metal to make incisions in the human body when preparing it for embalming.

As it was expressly forbidden that the Israelites should build an altar with hewn stone; and the reason given is, that an instrument of iron would pollute it, we may infer that iron should not be used in circumcision, which is no less an ordinance of Jehovah. It was an ancient idea, too, that a wound would heal sooner, when made by stone, than when made by iron or steel." Clarke quotes from Pliny, Ovid and Juvenal, to prove this See A. Clarke in loco.

As it was necessary that the men be circumcised before partaking the passover, and as only four days intervened between the passage of the Jordan and the time that institution should be observed, it has been concluded that the observance was delayed one month, in accordance with an arrangement of Moses, when any unavoidable circumstance made the delay necessary. The record says the people kept the passover on the 14th day of the month, but it does not say which month.

"The name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day. One would infer that the name of Gilgal was given to the place of the encampment, because the reproach of Egypt was rolled away. But Josephus tells us that Gilgal signifies liberty; "for since now they had passed over Jordan, they looked on themselves as freed from the miseries which they had undergone from the Egyptians and in the Wilderness." Ant. B. v. c. I. s. 11.

It is highly probable that interpreters have too generally connected the name of Gilgal with the rite of circumcision. It may, quite as reasonably, be connected with the deliverance of the people from their former oppression, and therefore imply their liberty.

The people kept the passover on the fourteenth of the month- the first month of their ecclesiastical year, called Abib, unless delayed as suggested above. It will be remembered that they crossed the river on the tenth, (iv. 19,) four days before. The next day, the people ate of the corn of the land, unleavened cakes and parched corn; and the day following, there was no manna, as there appears to have been up to that time.

It was required of the people that they eat unleavened bread at the passover. And this being the time of harvest, at least of the first-fruits, (the full harvest was seven weeks later,) it was expected that they would offer a meat offering of parched corn described in Lev. ii. 14. This will explain the reference to the unleavened cakes and the parched corn.

This is simply an apparition, (13-15,) like others often brought before us in the Scriptures; and some well attested instances may be found in profane history. The purpose of the apparition was to give specific orders about the mode of attack upon the city of Jericho. These are found in the next chapter, beginning at verse 2d.

It is unfortunate that the division of chapters occurs here; for it gives an appearance of an abrupt termination of the vision, when in fact there is no termination at this point. Besides, the first verse of chapter 6th is out of place; and if not spurious, should at least be put in brackets. The true connection requires that it be omitted or overlooked in reading.

Joshua is commanded to take off his shoes; for the place was holy. The custom of the ancients was, to take

off the shoes, when they went into any holy place. The requirement to Joshua, to take off his shoes, was based on this custom. The angel that appeared to Moses, Ex. iii. 1-6, made the same requirement; after which he proceeded to give his commands. So does the angel that appeared to Joshua; and hence we read:-"And the Lord said unto Joshua, See, I have given into thy hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valor," &c. This "captain" ranked Joshua; and it was very becoming in him to give specific commands about the mode of attack. He gives the commands accordingly; and these show that the fall of Jericho was to be in part a miraculous transaction.

Having received the order from his superior in command, Joshua proceeds at once to execute it; and the result was precisely as had been announced, proving that the angel was really "captain of the host of the Lord,' as he had claimed.

Seven trumpets. These were made of silver, and are particularly described, also the use to be made of them. It was the business of the priests to use these trumpets. See Num. x. 1-10, Seven was a sacred number among the Hebrews. And when no other number was positively required, it was customary to make the number seven to answer the purpose. In the taking of Jericho, it would seem that the number seven must have had a magical power. There were seven priests, whose business it was to blow on seven trumpets. They compassed the city seven days; and on the seventh day, they compassed it seven times.

That the fall of Jericho is a miracle, all must admit, that admit its fall in the manner here described. But that the laws of nature were violated, need not be presumed. If an earthquake overthrow a city, we do not say the laws of nature are violated. The case is no way different, if an earthquake proceed no farther than to overthrow, or prostrate, the walls of a city. All the difference between the fall of Jericho, and the overthrow