A Treatise on the Genius and Object of the Patriarchal, the Levitical, and the Christian Dispensations. By George Stanley Faber, B. D. 2 Vols. Pp. xxiv. and 431; and xx. and 438.

THEOLOGY," says Mr. Faber, in the preface to these volumes, " is a mine which cannot be very easily exhausted;" and unquestionably the pious and diligent inquirer will, while pursuing his researches, continually deduce instruction and edification. But there are some parts of this great mine, which however valuable in particular circumstances, can scarcely be considered as of general importSuch is, in some degree, the case with the present publication. It will be found highly interesting to the theological student; it may be said completely to subvert the Warburtonian theory; it demonstrates the fallacy of the Socinian scheme; it contains much that is excellent and instructive, but it is not perhaps generally conducive to Christian edification.

ance.

Mr. Faber's purpose is to establish a system relative to the genius and object of God's ancient communications to man, which is more scriptural than that of Bishop Warburton, who attempted, as most are aware, to demonstrate the divine legation of Moses from the absence of any intimation in his writings of a future state.

The expediency and importance of entering fully on this topic very much depends on the degree in which the sentiments of Warburton at present prevail. We have always felt that the Bishop's system almost died with him; and have indeed often suspected, that his Lordship had himself found some of the arguments of his opposo embarrassing, that, if not actually convinced of the fallacy of his positions, he was yet very much indisposed to proceed in their demonstration.

nents

Mr. Faber commences his work

by an introductory chapter on the peculiar genius of the three dispensations, in which he states,

1. That the genius of patriarchism was universality; that the apostasy of Cain

consisted in a rejection of the doctrine of scendants matured into absolute infidelity,

the atonement; that the apostasy of his de

and overspread the face of the whole earth; and that the apostasy after the flood consisted of astronomical hero-worship, while

the doctrine of the atonement was strenu

ously retained. 2. That the genius of the Levitical dispensation was particularity; and, 3. That the genius of Christianity, like that of patriarchism, is universality.

The object of the three dispensations is also thus stated by Mr. F.

As the substance of all the three dispenbroken; so, with some shades of difference, sations is the same, a triple cord not quickly the object of all the three may be pronounced the same also.

Of the Patriarchal dispensation, the object was to inculcate the doctrine of Redemption with its necessary concomitant the doctrine of a recovered happy immortality.

Of the Levitical dispensation, the object was to preserve the knowledge of the true God in the midst of surrounding idolatry, and to perpetuate and confirm the aboriginal doctrine of redemption, with all the blessed consequences which flow from it.

Of the Christian dispensation, the object is still to enforce the same vital doctrine, namely, the doctrine of redemption through a divine Mediator, and the consequent certainty of eternal life: but to enforce it with a degree of clearness and fulness, which can only spring from a now actually com

pleted deliverance.-Vol. ii. p. 316.

Through the whole of these discussions, Mr. F. displays great learning, extensive reading, acute argument, and solid piety. But we are at the same time compelled to observe, that his boldness of conjecture, and attachment to hypothesis, have led him to advance in some instances unguarded, and in others erroneous positions, which very materially diminish the value of his production.

To illustrate this assertion, we extract the commencement of the third chapter of his first book.

The second argument of Bishop Warbur ton, by which he would prove the subjec

tion of our first parents to natural religion in an anteparadisiacal state, rested, as we have seen, upon the gratuitous assumption, that the six days, in the course of which

God is said to have fashioned the material world out of Chaos, were six natural days, or six of those brief periods which are mea sured by the revolution of our planet round its axis.

Now, so far from allowing the propriety

of this assumption, I will venture altogether to deny it: for, that the six demiurgic days, instead of being nothing more than six natural solar days, were each a period of very considerable length, may be proved, partly by analogy of language, partly by

the very necessity of the narrative, partly by ancient tradition, and partly (and that most decisively) by the discoveries, or possibly the re-discoveries of modern physiologists. Vol. i. pp. 111, 112.

To us, who are plain men, it appears that there was no anteparadisiacal state, and that there is no such thing as natural religion. Mr. F.'s assertion, however, that each of the six days of creation was not a mere solar day but a period of very considerable length, demands a more serious notice, especially as it appears to us contrary to the word of God. He supports his position from the analogy of language as follows:

If God laboured six natural days and rested on the seventh natural day, the very turn of the statement will unavoidably imply, that he resumed his labours on the eighth natural day, or on the first day of the following natural week: just as in the case of the human commemorative sabbath, when man is commanded to labour six natural days and to rest on the seventh natural day, the very turn of the command implies, that his rest is to terminate with the seventh day, and that his labour is to recommence with the eighth.

If, then, God did not resume his creative labours on the eighth natural morning, his sabbath or rest certainly extended beyond the limits of the seventh natural day: and, if it extended beyond the limits of the seventh natural day, a single natural day most undoubtedly could not be the measure of the divine sabbath.-Vol. i. p. 114.

He then proceeds to argue, that the divine sabbath not having yet ceased, the seventh day must be nearly, or according to the Samaritan chronology more than, six thousand years long; and that

2

therefore each of the six days of creation must have been periods of at least SIX THOUSAND YEARS. Now, all this appears to us most gratuitous assumption. The Scriptures say, "On the seventh day

God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made." But this has nothing whatever to do with the resumption of the divine labours. A human artificer completes a work in so many days, rests from that work on such a day, and refreshes and recreates himself at a given time. But no man is justified from such a statement in asserting, that the artificer did or did not begin at any subsequent period any similar undertaking. Nor are we any where authorized to assert, that because God completed the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, in six days, and rested on the seventh day; that his rest was either confined to that seventh day, that it still continues,

or that the divine wisdom and

power may not have produced, or be still producing, in the regions of the universe far apart from our system, similar manifestations of his glory.

Šo, on the necessity of the narrative, Mr. F. remarks,

We are told, that God created every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: whence, as Bishop Warburton justly observes, we are obliged to conclude, that God created the whole vegetable family, not in a state of maturity, but in the conNow, the whole vegetable family was created dition of seed previous to germination. on the third day; birds of every description were created on the fifth day; and beasts, sixth day. Such being the case, it is clear, and reptiles, and man, were created on the on the supposition of the six demiurgic days being six natural days, that, without a miracle, all graminivorous, and seminivorous, and fructivorous animals must have perished through hunger: because, on such a supposition, the vegetable seeds, which were created and committed to the earth on the third day, could not, in the ordinary course of germination, have produced a sufficiency

of food for non-carnivorous animals created on the fifth and sixth days in time to save them from destruction by famine.-Vol. i. pp. 117, 118.

Here we are compelled to differ both from Bp. Warburton and Mr. Faber. We believe God created every plant perfect before it grew, in a similar sense as he created every animal perfect before it was produced in the ordinary way; that every plant, whether herb or tree, bearing seed or fruit, &c. was actually produced in its full and fair growth; that the trees were as perfect in their kind at the moment they were created, as man was in his; and that the world, at the close of the third natural day, exhibited not the bare and naked appearance of a new sown or planted nursery-ground, but the same diversity of vegetable productions, of trees, shrubs, and herbs, as are to be met with in the same climate and at the same season of the year in modern times; with only this difference, that the fruits, &c. would be more excellent: no plants were then noxious, there were no decayed nor dying trees, nothing which could in the most remote sense convey the idea of imperfection or decay; and this we conceive is a fair conclusion from the strict meaning of the original terms made use of by the sacred historian; so that, at the moment of their creation, the cow and the ox might feed, &c.

The argument from tradition is equally fallacious. How soon are the most striking events distorted and disguised when they become the subject of oral tradition! Take for instance the destruction of the Assyrian army, as recorded in Isaiah, xxxvii. and compare it with the story of Herodotus, derived from the Egyptians, of the same event: recollect too, that it took place in a neighbouring country; that the Egyptians had strong reason to remember Sennacherib; and that not more than two hundred and thirty

years elapsed between the destruction of the Assyrian host and the birth of the historian. Now, with such a specimen of the early corruption of tradition, we may be justified for treating very lightly any arguments deduced from so fallacious a source, concerning an event which took place six thousand years ago, when it may fairly be doubted whether, except the Bible, there is a single fragment of any work in existence which was committed to writing three thousand years after that event.

The discoveries of physiologists form the last argument brought forward by Mr. Faber, and evidently in his judgment the strongest. It has been ascertained, on making excavations into the earth, that relics of various animals are found which do not now exist. Now, as no class of animals was destroyed at the deluge, and it is assumed that none have been exterminated since, it is contended, that these must have been destroyed by some convulsion prior to that event. The supporters of this system derive encouragement from not being able to find among these fossil remains any fragments of the human frame, and from various calculations of the length of time necessary to transform wood into coal, &c. But this is, to say the least, very inconclusive reasoning; and he who builds any system on such a founddation can never calculate on its

permanency. Cuvier has himself pointed out, as quoted by Mr. Faber, circumstances under which several whole classes of animals might be destroyed. We know not how long a period of time is necessary to reduce either animal or vegetable substances to a fossil state. Fossil remains of the human species may yet be discovered in some of the unexplored regions of the earth; while at the same time it is more than probable, that the number of the human species in existence at the time of the de

luge bore a far smaller proportion to the number of animals than has been the case in any subsequent period and the countries where the antediluvians lived certainly afford far less opportunity to research than most other parts of the earth; not to add, that the climate, &c. would be less favourable to the preservation of such remains.

We have dwelt the longer on this subject because we are deeply convinced of the danger of tampering with sacred Scripture. Why did the Almighty make use of the term six days, if periods of several thousand years are meant? Was it intended to keep the majority of mankind in ignorance as to the real time employed in the work of creation? and has the expedient at length failed? Mr. F. indeed says,

Perhaps I need scarcely remark, that in Scripture nothing can well be more indefinite than the term, which we translate by the English word day. Sometimes it de

a

notes a single revolution of the earth round its axis: sometimes it denotes a revolution of the earth round the sun, or what we call a natural year: sometimes it denotes whole millenary: sometimes it denotes a period of probably great, but of wholly notes all the six demiurgic days collectively; that is to say, all the six demiurgic days viewed as jointly forming a single demiurgic day or period. Thus, in truth,

undetermined length: and sometimes it de

the term abstractedly would be more accurately expressed by the English word

period than by the English word day: for the context alone can determine, what specific period it may describe in any particular passage; though doubtless, in common speech it is ordinarily employed to set forth

a natural day, or a revolution of the earth round its axis.-Vol. i. pp. 112, 113.

But here Mr. F. is incorrect. The term day never denotes a whole millenary; and in both the instances to which he refers, a particle of comparison is introduced: "A thousand years in thy sight are but As yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night." "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." The obvious meaning is, that those periods, which are long in human imagination, are nothing

to the Divine Existence; and that he views all the events of past or of future, ages, with the same facility as we can review the events of one day or of one watch in the night.

But even were Mr. Faber correct in stating, that nothing can be well more indefinite than the term we translate day, we must still protest against the idea that it is used for widely different periods in the same sentence. Ezekiel was directed to lie on his side a certain number of days each day for a year; and from this and other sages we are justified in interpreting the prophetic periods according to this precedent. But to translate the term by the word day in one part of a sentence, and by six thousand years in another, is altogether unjustifiable.

pas

We

The length of this discussion compels us to notice very briefly the other parts of the work. do not apprehend, that the patriarchs possessed any such clear idea of an incarnate Saviour as Mr. F. imagines. Abraham, indeed," rejoiced to see the day of Christ, and he saw it and was glad." Most probably he was enabled in some extraordinary way to discover the meaning of that typical sacrifice which he was directed to offer. But it is highly improbable, that the succeeding patriarchs possessed any very clear views of redemption by the sacrifice of a Redeemer; it is still less probable that they should so communicate those views to their posterity, that the Gentiles should be induced to adopt human sacrifices in expectation of the coming of the incarnate Deity, or under the idea that he was already come; but least of all is it probable, that while this knowledge was perpetuated among the Gentiles it should so totally perish among the people of God, that notwithstanding the types, and shadows, and lively oracles, not a single trace should be found existing among the Jews, but that the

ABOUT two years ago, Mr. Stewart printed and circulated a tract recommending sincere Christians to unite in earnest prayer for the general out-pouring of the Holy Spirit, which has excited in many quarters a much greater degree of attention to the distinct personality, work, and offices of that divine Agent than had previously existed. Many who had occasionally prayed for divine assistance have been much more lively, urgent, and habitual in ‘interceding for this inestimable gift; and in consequence, agreeably to Mr. Stewart's suggestion, periodical meetings for prayer have taken place among different denominations of Christians, and courses of sermons have been preached on the various operations, influences, offices, &c. of the Holy Ghost.

Observing these effects which have, under the divine blessing, so happily resulted from his former exertions, Mr. S. has been induced to press the subject still further, and, in the pamphlet before us, to urge upon all the duty of earnestly interceding for the same divine influence to produce a revival of religion in this great metropolis.

He states the importance of such revival from the peculiar circumstances of this immense and rapidly increasing city; its vast population, 1,200,000 souls-their nearness to us as countrymen, relations, persons living within our viewtheir influence over the whole empire, London being for a part of the year the residence of almost all the higher orders of the community, whose character and example must by various channels, especially by means of their numerous servants and connexions, produce a corresponding effect throughout the empire; and touches upon the honour conferred on London, as the centre from which religion is flowing to distant nations by means of Bible, Missionary, Education, Tract, and other Societies, and as the metropolis of the greatest empire of the world.

He then draws a most lamentable picture of the present state of London; we wish we could say inore lamentable than true; but, alas! iniquity abounds to a fearful degree, and especially on the Lord's day.

It painful to revert for a moment to such glaring sins. What is the picture of London on the sabbath day? It commences in the morning with placards of Sunday newspapers, inviting its inhabitants to drown the thoughts of the sabbath in the news of passing politics. It proceeds with exposing to public sale the common articles the opening of many shops and markets,

of life. It reaches its noon-day by the pass

ing of public coaches to and from all parts, with the same unconcern, as if Almighty God had never appointed a day of rest for man and for beast. Its evening closes with the overflow of a multitude of tea-gardens, and places of low amusement on every side,