The oath is thus mentioned by Abraham. "The "Lord God of heaven, who took me from my father's "house, and from the land of my kindred, and who

spake unto me, and that sware unto me saying, un"to thy seed will I give this land." Genesis xxiv, 17. The promise is thus expressed, and recorded in Genesis xv, 13-16. "Know of a surety, that "thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not "theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict "them, four hundred years: And also, that nation "whom they shall serve, will I judge: And after"wards shall they come out with great substance ; "and thou shalt go to thy father's in peace, thou shalt "be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth generation, they shall come hither again; for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full." Here then it should very particularly be observed and noted, that the oath confering the possession of the land of Canaan, as an inheritance upon Abraham's seed, was truly and faithfully accomplished, because it was so far absolute and unconditional. But the promise made to the fourth generation, was that, which was reversed in God's breach of promise. The fourth generation, was the fourth born in Egypt, and consequently the eighth from Abraham; because those born to him, before the going down into Egypt, were in succession, that of Isaac, of Jacob, of Judah, and of Pharez.* The

Doctor Adam Clarke, commenting on Genesis XLVI, observes thus, verse 12, "The sons of Pharez, were Hezron and "Hamul. It is not likely, that Pharez was more than ten years

descending line from Judah born in Egypt, was successively constituted by Hezron † and his brethren; Aram and his cotemporaries; Aminidab and his generation; and finally by Nashon § and those of his father's household. This last, was the designated fourth generation, as is evident from Numbers 1, 7. And betwixt them and the fifth, God himself drew the line of separation. All twenty years old and upwards, were to perish in the wilderness. But their children who were under twenty years, were to be put into the possession of that land, which their father's had despised. Some of the elder branches of the fifth generation, probably partook of their father's sins, and perished with them; but the younger, being under age, are adopted, to supplant their unbelieving and rebellious fathers.

..

But we are now to consider, wherefore the divine promise was broken, to this hapless fourth generation. Born slaves in Egypt, they seek the promised inheritance, a land flowing with milk and honey; but they perish under manifold disasters in the wilderness. God in his own behalf declares the cause. "And the

"of age, when he came into Egypt; and if so, he could not "have had children; therefore, it is necessary to consider Hez66 ron and Hamul, as being born during the seventeen years, "that Jacob sojourned in Egypt."

† Hezron, is both by Luke and Matthew, called Esrom, in the genealogies.

Aram is called Ram, in 1 Chronicles 11, 25.

S Nahshan is is called Naasson, by Matthew and Luke, but in Numbers 1, 7, Nahshon.

"Lord said unto Moses, how long will this people

provoke me? And how long will it be ere they be "lieve me, for all the signs which I have shewn "amongst them? I will smite them with the pesti"lence, and disinherit them." (Numbers xiv, 11, 12. The Lord indeed, at the intercession of Moses, so far pardoned, as not immediately to destroy them. For "The Lord said, I have pardoned according to

thy word: But as truly as I live, all the earth shall "be filled with the glory of the Lord. (The glory "of his justice is meant.) Because of those men whe "have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did "in Egypt, and in the wilderness, have tempted me "now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my "voice; surely they shall not see the land which I "sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them "that provoked me see it." Verses 20-23. The last and greatest of these ten provocations, was the unbelieving rebellion, on hearing the evil report of the ten spies, who were immediately cut off. The other provocation, St. Paul thus enumerates and comments upon, viz. “But with many of them, God was not well pleased; for they were overthrown in the wilderness. "Now these things were our examples, to the intent "we should not lust after evil things, as they also "lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of "them; as it is written, the people sat down to eat "and drink, and rose up to play." "Neither let us

"commit fornication, as some of them committed." "Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmur"ed, and were destroyed of the destroyer." 1 Corinthians, x, 5, 6, 7, 9.

This apostle, here enumerates indeed more fully, and remarks much more largely on these unhappy events; still urging them, as admonitions to all christians, of every succeeding age. And in his epistle to the Hebrews, he alludes most pointedly, to this fall of the fourth generation. In chapter 111, 17, 18, 19, he thus speaks. "But with whom was he grieved "forty years? Was it not with them that had sinned, "whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? And to "whom sware he, that they should not enter into his "rest, but to them that believed not? So we see, that

66

they could not enter in, because of unbelief." But St. Paul's inferences from this event, and his application of these inferences; I shall close in his own words, as expressed in Hebrews IV, 1; and for this purpose, shall make use, both of the common translation, and of the literal one, by Macknight.

The common translation. "Let us therefore fear, "lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest, 66 any of you should seem to come short of it."

The literal translation. "Wherefore, let us be afraid, lest a promise of entrance into his rest being "felt, any of you should actually fall short of it."

NOTE III.

This note refers to the note last preceding page.

SHOULD any reader (being disposed to

cavil) object, that the circumstances of Eli and his

house, and of the fourth generation, are each irrevelant to the case, of the days being shortened for the elect's sake; because, that in this latter instance, whatever interposition of divine providence took place, it was of a merciful kind; whereas, the interposition in the two former events, was of a different nature, being awfully corrective, and consequently, that no such analogy existed, as would justify comparisons betwixt the former and latter dispensations of divine dealing. Such objection, will admit of this reply, viz. That the foregoing argument, being only, to maintain the conditionality, and consequent mutability of divine decrees, in some respects: Therefore, that it matters not in respect to the validity of the argument, how the decrees are changed, if only proved, to be at all changed; and this change, being undeniably proved, in the instances of Eli, and of the fourth generation, are consequently, evidences strongly corroborative of the present translation of Matthew XXIV, 22.

Should the objector be disposed still to continue his cavil against the supposed defect, in respect to analogy, he may in such predicament, be refered to the well known cases of Ahab and Ninevetes; in each of which, divine determinations were altered, at the suggestions of mercy. And should his reluctant mind, demand still further proofs, he may, by consulting Jeremiah XVIII, 7, 8, 9, 10, obtain such further evidence, as shall obliterate the last remaining doubt; unless his judgment is perverted by deep rooted prejudice, and unconquerable wilfulness.