mind so peculiarly constructed as his, the only question which will be put to him, and which peremptorily requires an immediate answer, is this: Does he believe God's word, and rest for salvation from the wrath to come, on the faith in Christ? If not, then there is no alternative, no excuse, no help for him: his doom is sealed! As the Samaritan lord was trodden to death in the gate, so surely will that unbeliever "be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord.”

It is not more certain that God's promises to the righteous will be fulfilled, than that he will execute his threatenings against the wicked. All that God has promised to the former, they shall receive and enjoy. Yet a little while, and they shall "lift up their heads, and behold their redemption drawing nigh." Singled out of "every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation," they shall enter on the riches of "the inheritance of the saints in light."

But what has become of those who rejected the discoveries of God's word, and would not accredit his promises to the faithful? Have they then the evidence that God hath "spoken unto us in these last days by his Son," and that he is able to save those who put their trust in him! Do they even behold what the righteous are permitted to enjoy? Yes, there is heaven! There are the shining ranks of angelic intelligence; there the rejoicing multitudes whose robes have been made white in the blood of the Lamb; there the resplendent and ineffable manifestations of the Divine presence:

"It is glory beyond all glory ever seen,

By waking sense or by the dreaming soul!"

Fain would they now enter that world of light, and purity, and bliss; but ah! it is too late.

God is faithful, having promised: and so must he be true to himself, having threatened: "The righteous enter life eternal; but the wicked go away into everlasting punishment."

THE APOSTATE.

THE history of the Jewish kings, though it abounds in remarkable facts, is wanting in all that secures the interest of profane history. We read of political movements, military equipments, and bloody battles, but all is narrated in a manner, not to exalt the regal actor, but to exhibit his principles; not to incite a vain ambition, or thirst for martial glory, but to impress the fear of God, and the duty of obedience. Great achievements arrest attention, and great works rise upon our view; but they appear of subordinate moment compared with the religious character of him whose reign is depicted. In profane history, man is seen in his proud authority, ambitious plans, and selfish manœuvres; in sacred history, God is seen in his sovereignty over man, true to his word, and just in his dealings, though he may long "wait to be gracious.'

In the former, religion is State policy, and the priest but second to the king; in the latter, religion is the supreme law of the realm, and the king subordinate to the prophet. The king is placed on trial, and it soon appears whether he is a righteous or a wicked man, and whether his reign will be prosperous or disastrous. Whatever his principles or his passions, his virtues, his vices, or his foibles, all are seen, through his recorded acts, with unerring distinctness. The history of other kings, however instructive to those who are called to occupy posts of authority and rule, can be of no practical benefit to the general mind. After traversing the voluminous pages of a Rollin or a Hume, much as we have gathered respecting any king in his relation to his subjects, we know little or nothing of him as a man, in his relation to God. But,

in the sacred record, a few sentences suffice to reveal the actual character of a ruler, not merely as he seemed to men, but as he was in the sight of God. Hence, as the example of the king to his subjects, such may it now be (though at so long an interval) to us: either a pattern or a warning. Every man, whatever his sphere in life, is now tested, as were the kings of old; and the inspired record of their acts is as a mirror, in which he may behold his own moral self. The correctness of this view will appear from considering the acts of Amaziah, the eighth King of Judah, son and successor of Joash.1

At the commencement of his reign, he seemed to be most gentle and placable in his temper, and strongly disposed to serve God. He subjected his father's murderers to the penalty of the law, but spared their children; steadfastly opposed the worship of idols, but overlooked the practice of sacrificing in the high places. There was in him a strange blending of justice and lenity, of zeal and laxity, of religious principles and selfish interests; and, though to the eye of his subjects he presented the aspect of a good man and righteous prince, yet his heart was not perfect: he had no singleness of eye, no unreserved devotedness, no true humility. Under a prepos sessing exterior lurked a love of excitement that betokened an unquiet reign; a thirst for power that might one day involve him in war; a pride that might betray him into malignant passions; and a regard for pelf that endangered his fealty to God. He supported the temple-service, yet his heart was more in military tactics than in the worship of God. He showed great respect for the law, but it was not after "the manner of David."

Without consulting the Divine pleasure, he projected an expedition against the Edomites; and though God had favoured him, in enabling him to collect so large and well-equipped an army, that there was no likelihood of any king competing with him in numbers, yet, as a precautionary measure, he must hire a hundred thousand allies, and these, too, from among an idolatrous people! They, however, were at last dismissed, at the instance of a prophet whom God had sent to remonstrate with him against the measure, and who assured him that, notwith

1 2 Chronicles, chap. xxv.

standing his loss of the hundred talents which he had advanced to his mercenaries, God was able to recompense him a hundredfold. But, in yielding to the prophet, it is not improbable he was influenced partly by the fear of losing his life should he persist in his plan, and partly by the hope of some great reward for his pecuniary sacrifice. Duty entered not into his councils; and hence, success only served to develop the latent and ruling elements of his character.

He had defeated the armies of Edom in a pitched battle, and, thinking to spread the opinion of his strength and the terror of his arms, had forced ten thousand of the fugitives over a precipice; and now he is rejoicing in his triumph, and instead of acknowledging his obligations to the God of battles, actually paying homage to the idol-gods of the conquered Edomites! In vain did the prophet rebuke him for worshipping idols which had not been able to deliver their votaries from the power of his sword. So far from listening to such timely counsel, he sternly bade the prophet forbear, on penalty of his displeasure; and, yielding to the promptings of his pride and revenge, not only determined to inflict summary vengeance on those who, on being dismissed from his army, had plundered the country through which they returned, but to challenge the king of Israel. This defiance, though at first treated with contemptuous ridicule, Jehoash was eventually forced to accept. The sarcastic parable of the wild beast treading down a proud thistle that had demanded the daughter of a strong and stately cedar in marriage, served to exasperate the proud conqueror of Edom; and, without admitting to himself the possibility of defeat, he forthwith invaded the domains of his kingly neighbour. But he has presumed on his own greatness, underrated his enemy's strength, and, above all, forgotten that God had a controversy with him for his obstinate idolatry. The battlefield of Bethshemesh signalized his defeat, and sealed his disgrace. Instead of returning as a hero with the trophies of victory, he is himself a prisoner; carried back to Jerusalem by him whom he had so haughtily challenged, and there forced not only to give up a large number of hostages to secure the peace, but to witness the sad demolition of a part of the wall of the city, and the pillage of the temple and palace. Still, his reverses did not humble him: and though he was permitted to

reign for fifteen years after his captivity, yet he "did not return unto the Lord." On the contrary, he waxed worse and worse, until his iniquities and idolatries were no longer to be endured, even by his own subjects. In vain did he attempt to flee from the conspiracy which had been formed against him: Lachish could furnish no hiding-place for one whom “God had determined to destroy." He who was once surrounded by three hundred thousand troops, is now without a solitary aid. He who thrust ten thousand of his fellow-creatures from off the brink of an awful precipice, now falls himself, unpitied, unlamented, by the hand of his servants!

But the case of Amaziah is only one of the numerous instances of apostacy and its consequences which stain the annals of Judaism. We look back on such instances with astonishment: especially when we consider that their religion had been authenticated and established by a series of miraculous events, and that temporal rewards and punishments invariably followed the Hebrew rulers, according as they obeyed or disobeyed the Divine requirements. But though length of days and general prosperity were the portion of those who conscientiously observed the Mosaic enactments, and poverty, disease, war, and a violent death, the threatened consequences of their violation, yet the very fact that the Mosaic economy was burdened with minute and irksome ceremonies, might have induced an indisposition to obey, and rendered every temptation to remissness or neglect only the more insidiously effective; while familiarity with the regular course of things under that dispensation might have impaired, in the Hebrew mind, the force which seems to us to be attached to the idea of temporal sanctions. It is a question, moreover, whether similar reverses in life were not observable among the surrounding heathen nations; and if so, the human mind might then, as now, have been prone to rest in second causes: or, while observing the course of things, many a one, through the "deceitfulness of sin," might have secretly indulged the hope of sinning with impunity. Besides, as the change which the government of the Hebrews had undergone in its external form, from the judicial and patriarchal to the monarchical, its original theocratic element was gradually lost sight of; and it is not improbable they came at last to think that they should vie in their manners and customs with