But our present concern is with man, according to his station among the works of nature; for though the moral history of this "son of God," is what forms the chief subject of the Bible, yet we are not at present sustaining the character of moralists, but of naturalists.

Man was created male and female; the male first, before whom, as an exercise of his understanding, God caused the creatures to pass, as it were, in review; by this he became acquainted with his own vocal powers, by this he improved them; he acquired fresh abilities by practice; he imitated the sounds of these animals; he challenged them by sounds of his own; but no one answered, no rationality beamed out from among them; not one of them asked him a question; not one of them made him a reply; they could hold no conference with him: they replied to the voices of their mates in accents of affection, but affection for Adam they had none, even while they were obeying his commands. The Lord God said, "it is not good for man to be alone;" Adam also, "found no consort for himself;" but divine omnipotence easily accomplished what divine omniscience knew would be proper, and from a part of Adam himself, God formed a sex to be his companion. We do not see such modes of generation now in larger animals; but we see smaller creatures divide themselves into two, each part of which is instantly completed into life, and is instantly perfect. Since the distinction of great and small cannot possibly be any obstacle to Divinity, what forbids us from comparing, by way of illustration, the generation by division of Adam, to those generations by division, of which we may if we please have daily proofs before our eyes. The fact I myself have seen.

We proceed now to consider the residence provided for this lovely pair, this origin of mankind.

VERSES 5, 6.

"The Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth [ HEARеTJ] in general, and man [ON ADAM] was not, to till the whole [ ADамаH] culti vable ground: but a copious stream [8 AD] rose out of the earth [87 HEARеTJ] and watered the whole surface of [no HE ADаMAH] the cultivable ground." This opens a sense very different from the import of our translation, which renders "a mist." It is, how ever, perfectly agreeable to what we shall offer on the tenth verse, which indeed is, I presume, a more particular repetition of the same information. But, as the version is so different, it behoves us to justify it; which we do by observing, 1st, that the LXX render de, and Jerom also, fons, a fountain; so that the notion is not new, though perhaps the application is: the same say Aquila and the Syriac. 2dly, The word ad or aid, does not usually signify "mist," but rather a sudden bursting forth, like a watery storm. from a cloud; and metaphorically, an overwhelming

occurrence. I know that Dr. Geddes, quoting Theodoret and Oleaster, would refer this copious stream of water to the chaotic flood, before it was drained to its proper receptacle; but, Ist, I do not see how that flood could be said to rise from the earth, it rather, I suppose, descended on it; nor, 2dly, how it could be said to water the cultivable part of the earth, which is what the writer clearly has in view, because he says immediately before, that man, or ADAM, was not yet formed, or commissioned to cultivate it.

OF PARADISE.

We have considered the earth as revolving on its axis, and thereby bringing every part of its surface in succession before the station of creative power; hence it will follow, that each climate of the globe had a distribution of plants and animals proper to it; and that the whole was replenished with life in various forms. But the general surface of the earth was, perhaps, not equally pleasant throughout, if indeed it was equally filled or finished; for I see no reason why some parts should not hereafter acquire productions which they did not now possess, as we see happen from various causes in our own day. Nevertheless, there was one particular spot, where divine goodness embellished the territory with superior attention; where the grateful alternation of hill and dale, of land and water, the peculiar salubrity of the atmosphere, and temperature of the climate, where these and numerous other felicities, united to render it a fit residence for the noblest work of God.

There are two questions on this subject: 1st, the properties of the place; 2dly, its situation. This last question has exercised the pens of several learned writers; but I think the consideration of one question may lead us to understand, at least, if not to determine the other,

Without affirming that the earth had, or had not originally, as it has now, its torrid zone and its frozen zone, I think we may safely suppose, that Paradise was in a temperate region; it was therefore either in a temperate zone, or on a mountain, or hill, in or near the torrid zone; for it is to be observed, that the tops of mountains, even in Africa, are covered with snow; and the water on them is frozen into ice, while the most sultry heat rages in the plains at their feet. It will follow, that there was, as there actually is, as great a choice of temperature among a range of hills, as in all the distances, of latitude, from the equator to the pole. Paradise therefore was in a hilly country.

2dly, The varieties of climate enabled the various tribes of animals to enjoy themselves, though calculated for different latitudes; those which delight in heat might bask in the most brilliant beams of noon: those of cooler constitutions might find nearer the hill top a cooler, and freer breathing; those plants too which shoot into luxuriance by means of water excited to activity by heat, might display their am

plest foliage below; while those to whom a milder air is more congenial, might vegetate with undiminished vigour above. In short, by means of the various elevations a hill, or hills, affords, every animal, and every plant of every clime might be associated in one most brilliant harmony, no less of temper than of colours. Besides this, we are told "a river went out of Eden to water the garden; from thence it was parted, and became into four heads." Perhaps this would be better rendered, and a stream rose, gushed up, in Eden, to water the garden, where it formed a lake, and from that place it was divided, and existed in four heads; i.e. heads of rivers. Now where do we look for heads of rivers? Where do rivers take their rise but in elevated situations? The high mountains of Switzerland furnish the Rhone, the Rhine, the Danube; those of England furnish the Thames and the Severn; and so of other countries. The hills furnish the sources of streams. All these marks agree with a hilly country, no less than with the effect and inference of correct reasoning. The geographical situation of this garden is treated of elsewhere; we therefore conclude by representing Paradise as comprising a considerable extent of country; part of it consisting of hills, whose summits extended those prospects which on all sides delighted the eye, while they afforded choice of shelter, and of temperature for plants, for animals, and even for man himself. This scene was still further diversified by an extensive sheet of water, of whose inhabitants, and of their fellows in other waters, man hereby acquired a knowledge; and so abundant was this water, that, issuing on four sides from the lake which it formed, it became four streams, which pursued their courses from thence toward other parts of the earth.

We have now terminated our sketch of the progress and order of creation, in which we have been more especially desirous of shewing the propriety of that succession of events which the sacred writer narrates. To confirm it, let us for a moment reverse the order; were the animals created before vegetables, on what were they to feed' What preparation is made for the support of that life which they have just received? Must they lay it down instantly, instantly return to that nothing from which they are recently commanded? Or were vegetables created before the elements had been purified? From whence then could they receive the stimulus necessary to perfect, and to support them? Earth forms but a small part of the substance and structure of a vegetable: light forms much, air forms much more, water most of all; shall a vegetable then for want of water, air, and light, return infructuous to that chaos which had but lately suffered its production? And the very elements themselves, how could they subsist to any beneficial purpose, till they had been separated, arranged, purified, and, as it were, sublimed into activ

ity by the concentration of their powers and particles? And how could the elements be purified, except by a rotary motion of the globe? What way so fit, what way so adequate and compendious? This answers a question which has been asked; why God employed six whole days in completing the creation? because the order of things required a revolution of the globe to each portion of the creation, as it proceeded; and each revolution produced night and day. But were these revolutions absolutely of the same length as the present revolutions of the globe? We do not know; perhaps they were only half so long, a quarter so long, in this case they would answer the purposes of revolutions, but what becomes of the question of length of time employed in creation? For aught we can prove, the six revolutions of the globe were completed in six hours: but suppose they were ten times as long as they are now, it is just as reasonable to inquire, wherefore God does not command all generations of creatures to appear together, as it would be to inquire wherefore he thought proper to suffer some kinds of plants, &c. to come to maturity before he produced others.

It is beyond the power of imagination, as well as of belief, to admit the idea of a settled, considerate, well-informed atheist: whoever will now examine the works of creation, now, when the regularity of their motions is confirmed into fixed laws, and established with such precision as to justify our calling it the course of nature, such an one will find it extremely difficult to convince himself, even if he wishes it, that the operations of nature are not directed by a superior agent: but, whoever will suppose himself a spectator at a period before this course began, when the vast mass was dead, inert, confused, will find the contrast overpower his mind, and vanquish his objections at a stroke: He only who could roll the planets round the sun could revolve this earth on its axis, could separate its confusion, could arrange its divisions, could ornament its surface, and could animate its inhabitants, he must be God; he must be the proper object of worship; which seems to be the very conclusion the sacred writer designed should be drawn by his readers, when he begins by observing, that, "in the beginning GoD created the heaven and the earth."

But did not God create other worlds, other systems of worlds? Yes, surely; "He made the stars also," says Moses. The same power which formed and decorated the earth formed those brilliant globes of light; but I have no commission to write their history, that may be written by some one among themselves; it is not my office, nor indeed does it concern the reader or myself." Let us not think that all the works of God terminate on ourselves: we behold them, we admire them, but they are neither our property nor our subjects: instead of embarrassing ourselves on questions relating to them, let us take care

that this be not that spot of the divine dominions from which his revenue of praise is expected, but refused; that which he has distinguished by bounty, and ornamented with even divine munificence, but which withholds those acknowledgments due from the rational spirit to its divine original, from the creature to the Creator; from man to God: forbid it conscience, forbid it gratitude, forbid it heaven!

CHAPTER II. VERSE 12.

The GOLD of that country is good: i.e. gold in its natural state, before it has passed the fire; gold of great purity, whether found in masses of greater or less magnitude, or in grains mingled with the sands of rivers, gold dust: which perhaps is what is here intended.

BDELLIUM OF BEDOLACH, 72. Many suppose that this is a mineral production: the Lxx translate avopana, a carbuncle. The Rabbins are followed by Reland in calling it chrystal, which is countenanced by the LXX, who render xpurtaλλov in Numb. xi. 7. Solinus, cap. 15. says, that chrystal is found in Scythia, "and although it is also found in much of Europe, and in some places of Asia, nevertheless, that which comes from Scythia is the most valuable." Dionysius Periegetes, also, verse 781. says, that on the banks of the river Thermodon is cut the chrystal, as pure and as clear as ice. But some instead of bedolach read berolach, and these render the beril, which, say they, is the prime kind of chrystal.

The very learned Bochart, Hieroz, p. ii. lib. v. cap. 5. seeks the bedolach among living animals; according to him it is the pearl in its shell. This he illustrates by the comparison of the manna to the bedolach, Numb. xi. 7. i.e. to its white colour, and to its round figure; and he supports his opinion by the signification of the root a badal, to separate, to set apart, as if the bedolach was the chief of pearls, like what Pliny calls a union, lib. ix. cap. 35. which name is given particularly to pearls of the largest kind.. Others think the gum of a tree is meant by this word, as may be seen in Dictionary, article BDELlium.

But I would remark, that the Hebrew has another word for pearls, peninim; and if pearls were really the article meant, why not call them by their proper name? In my opinion, the substance intended is that clear, refractive, natural production called "mother of pearl" by our jewellers, &c. which may fairly be taken as an object of comparison in respect of the brilliant hues, the fugitive, but delicate and vivid, flashes of colour which it exhibits as viewed in different lights. From the comparison of a tender pellucid grain, the manna, to this substance, I conclude that both possessed the principles of refraction in a very observable degree. Vide FRAGMENT, No. 152. Dr. Geddes has produced a passage from Benjamin of Tudela, for the purpose of proving that the bedolach is the pearl; but I think it favours quite as

strongly, what I have hinted at, vis. the mother of pearl. The Rabbi's words are, nan xx, the place of finding bedolach. In the month of March, says he, the drops of rain water which fall on the surface of the sea, are swallowed by the mothers of pearl, and carried to the bottom of the sea; where, being fished for, and opened in September, they are found to contain pearls. It is remarkable, says Dr. Geddes, that the author uses both the Hebrew name bedolah, and the Arabic lulu, one at the beginning of his narration, the other at the end of it. But observe, 1st, this story of the formation of pearls is false; 2dly, the narrative is confused, and it is not clear that the same substance is called both bedolach and lulu. The place was El-katiph, a town on the Persian gulf. Now think the different ideas of chrystal, which is transparent, of a relation to pearls, or connection with pearls, and of refractive tints of colours, all unite in the mother of pearl; which therefore seems to have most plausibilities in its favour, as being the bedolach. lach. But I would not exclude some precious stone, or gem, which also may possess these properties. Vide the Illustration of the MAP of Paradise.

The onyx-stone, SHонам. This stone ornamented the pectoral of Aaron, Exod. xxviii. 20; xxxix. 6. Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and others, render onyx; the LXX, Euapaydos, emerald; or aidos pasivos, a green leek-coloured stone; a name given to emeralds of the most valuable kind; such as are, particularly, those of Scythia. Pliny says, lib. xxxvii. cap. 5. "The most valuable emeralds are the Scythian, so named from the country which yields them; they are more highly coloured than any others, and are without defect; so that these emeralds are as much superior to others, as others are to ordinary gems." Comp. Solinus, cap. 15. After all, is this shoham of the text the lapis lazuli, or stone with gold veins, which yields the ultramarine blue ?

VERSE 21.

SLEEP of Adam. This is expressed in the Hebrew by a peculiar word, na TARDеMAH, Lxx, ecstasy; it was not ordinary sleep, neither was it a lethargy. I think, on the whole, it was a kind of prophetic rapture, a state much like that of St. Paul, "whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell:" and thus it is said of Abraham, Gen. xv. 12. a

tardemak, a state of suspension, as it were, of the bodily faculties fell on him, to qualify him for receiving a prophetic vision: the same I understand of Daniel, chap. viii. 18. "I was in a deep sleep, nardemah Chaldee, but the angel raised me" to enjoy a prophetic vision; and, therefore, I presume, Adam had a vision of the creation of Eve, and when he awoke he found his new companion a reality, and his vision changed into possession.

The RIB of Adam does not signify a single rib, but a series or system of lateral construction. Probably

a considerable portion of his side, was separated from Adam, and formed into a companion for him, "bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh." By being formed By being formed from Adam, Eve partook of that quickening spirit which God had breathed into Adam; no separate quality, no particle of the divine spirit different or distinct from that of Adam was imparted to Eve; as a child now partakes of the life of its mother, so did Eve of the life of Adam. We know that a small space contains the future infant in its primary state, yet a child just born is perfect in its parts, so probably Eve possessed a relative perfection when she was parted from Adam, but was suddenly matured to full vigour and beauty by her divine Maker. There is no greater difficulty in supposing that a portion of Adam was quickened into life, than there is in supposing that a portion of a mother is quickened into life; if we are asked how this is done, we must answer we cannot tell; yet every day demonstrates the fact. Moreover, if Eve had received a distinct and separate rational spirit from her Maker, she would have been independent of Adam; and in fact only allied to him by the borrowing of a few particles of animated dust. There being no rationality in brutes, it signified nothing how many distinct individuals, or even distinct pairs of them were created, since no importance attached to their descent; but it was not so in relation to man, who possessed a something not imparted to brutes.

TREE OF LIFE.

This tree appears to have been the counterpart to the tree of appropriation of good or evil, and to have contained in it those salutary properties which would have mingled with the circulating fluids of the human frame, and would have renovated their vigour inconceivably beyond what our usual food does at present We know, that when fatigued, exhausted, fainting, food revives and invigorates us, so I apprehend, when the human frame had through length of time been weakened in its active powers, the tree of life would have supplied, as it were, fresh oil to its mechanism, and fresh activity to its impulsive agents. Why was not the fruit of this tree partaken of by man? because man had not yet experienced infirmity, had felt no fatigue, no weakness; why should he seek a remedy, who was totally ignorant of disease? And if indeed Adam had once partaken of that fruit, the effect of that participation would no doubt have worn off in time, so that it would have terminated as to any sensible benefit, and would have required repeated, perhaps even constant renewals. In short, as at present poison once received is fatal in its effects on the human body, yet the effects of food though nutritive are not permanent but require repetition, so I apprehend the tree of knowledge was poisonous at a single reception of its fruit, yet the tree of life would have been salutary, only in consequence of repeated

receptions of its balsamic and renovating virtues. N.B. We are not obliged to take the words "live for ever" in the instance of man, as implying an absolute eternity; but a very long space of time, a perpetuity: why may we not suppose, that after a due course of ages of obedience, the human spirit of Adam would have been translated to a superior world, a world of spirits, as its reward?

Observe, the tree of life was distinguished, 1st. by its place in the middle of the garden; 2dly, it was not prohibited, as the tree of knowledge was. We may gather the properties attributed to this tree from the Revelations, chap. ii. 7. it stood in the midst of the Paradise of God. Chap. xxii. 2. It bare ripe fruit monthly; the leaves of the tree, and fruit also, no doubt, were for healing, restoring health, to the nations. Now, since at this day health is maintained or disturbed by our choice of food, why might it not be the same in Paradise? Consider the distinctions of meats established in all nations: especially the abstinence of the Bramins, and others professing sanctity among the most ancient nations, and in the remotest times. Did the divine shekinah appear at this tree in the midst of the garden?

VERSES 16, 17.

TREE of knowledge of good and evil. Understand, not a tree capable of imparting knowledge, but rather the tree of discrimination of good and evil; or tree appointed to determine whether man would by his choice, by obedience or disobedience, appropriate good or evil. We are speaking now as naturalists, and under that character can only say, that probably this plant had some injurious, perhaps inflammatory, principle in it; some poisonous quality, whereby it was utterly unfit for human food, being inimical to the human constitution; this was a natural reason why it was forbidden; a natural reason why death attended the partaking of it, yet it might not be imgnediately fatal to all creatures which partook of it ; and hence Eve might think it safe for herself, as it appeared to be for them. I may illustrate my notion by reference to the Manchineel apple-tree of the West Indies, under which if a traveller reposes, he suffers for it; if it rains while he stands under it, and the drops fall on his flesh, they raise blisters; if he touches any of the sap of the branches, or the juice of the leaves, it poisons the parts which receive it ; if he eats of the apples he dies; yet parrots eat of them and do not die: but their flesh acquires a property of rendering those who occasionally feed on it very sick.

Observe, this tree was distinguished, 1st, by special information as to its deleterious qualities, so that perhaps Eve was right when she said, " neither may we touch it;" 2dly, by its place and situation in the garden; 3dly, by the partial truth, but not the whole truth, which the tempter represented to Eve, yet