of any thing that is in heaven | neath, or that is in the water under above, or that is in the earth be- the earth. ουκ έσονται σοι θεοι έτεροι πλην εμου, there shall not be to thee other gods besides me. But the Heb. no where properly signifies besides or except, but always before, in the presence of. The scope of the precept is evidently to make known the true and only object of worship, and to forbid the annexing of any other object of religious reverence, respect, and homage to that which they were exclusively required to serve. It requires a conduct accordant with the declaration of Jehovah himself, Is. 42. 8, 'My glory will I not give to another.' The language does not necessarily imply the reality, the positive existence, of any such adventitious deities, but they were not to have any that were so esteemed; or as the apostle says, 1 Cor. 8. 5, 6, 'Though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there are gods many and lords many); but to us there is but one God, the Fa. ther, of whom are all things, and we in him.' The precept does not seem to be directed primarily and immediately against that idolatry which consists in the use of fabricated images, although this is virtually forbidden, but against the putting any thing else in the place of the one living and true God. This may be done mentally as well as manually. There may be idolatry without idols; and the scope of this commandment seems to be mainly to forbid the making of any other objects, whether persons or things, real or imaginary, the objects of that supreme regard, reverence, esteem, affection, and obedience which we owe to God alone. As God is the fountain of happiness, and no intelligent being can be happy but through him, whoever seeks for supreme happiness in the creature instead of the Creator, is guilty of a violation of this command. Whatever it be that sets up a rival interest in our souls, absorbing that love and service which belongs to the true God, that is another God before him. Consequently, the proud man, who idolizes himself; the ambitious man, who pays homage to popular applause; the covetous man, who deifies his wealth; the sensualist, who lives to gratify his low appetites; the doting lover, husband, father, mother, who suf fer their hearts to be supremely ab sorbed in the love of the creature, all come under the charge of transgressing the first commandment. In fact obedience to this precept would perfectly enthrone the Lord in our judgment and affections; and the strength of our love being thus given to him, we should love all others for his sake, and according to the measure that he had enjoined; whilst the violation of it destroys this subordination, and gives the creature the throne in our heart. With the ut most propriety therefore does it stand foremost in the tables of the Decalogue. It is the foundation of all the rest. THE SECOND COMMANDMENT. 4. Thou shalt not make unto thee, &c. The second commandment, comprised in v. 4-6, differs from the first by having respect to the mode of worship rather than the object. It consists of two parts, a precept and a sanction. The precept forbids the making of any sculptured or painted images of any object in heaven or earth, to be employed in religious worship. Nothing was to be attempted of the nature of a likeness or sensible representation of the invisible: Deity, nothing constructed or portrayed which should stand as an arbitrary symbol of Jehovah, who was to be worshipped as a pure intelligent spirit, infinitely removed beyond the possibility of any material representation. Aware of the strong idolatrous tendency in human nature, and with a view to preclude its breaking forth among the chosen people had not the most distant reference to the Most High took especial care in his the Deity, or to religion. But let us manifestation at Mount Sinai that the consider the passages in which Moses Israelites should see 'no manner of prohibits images, in their connexion similitude,' nothing that could after- with the context, and see whether any ward be represented by an image. This such exposition ought to be given them: is particularly adverted to in the subse- We find them (for I think it best to quent account of that transaction, Deut. point them all out together) in Ex. 20. 4. 12-15—23, which forms the most 4, 5. Deut. 4. 15-18; 27. 15. Now, from suitable commentary on the precept be- the connexion, it is evident, that images fore us; 'And the Lord spake unto you of the Deity are alone spoken of in all out of the midst of the fire; ye heard these passages; and the man, who, from the voice of the words, but saw no simi- the detached clause, Thou shalt make litude; only ye heard a voice. Take ye to thyself no image, concludes, that therefore good heed unto yourselves; no image durst have been painted, or (for ye saw no manner of similitude on scrawled upon a rock, or cut in wood the day that the Lord spake unto you in or stone, might, with equal reason, deHoreb out of the midst of the fire); lest tach from their connexion the following ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a words, which come immediately after graven image, the similitude of any the prohibition of images, Thou shalt figure, the likeness of male or female. not raise thine eyes to heaven to behold The likeness of any beast that is ou the the sun, moon, and stars, and understand earth, the likeness of any winged fowl them as meant to imply, that we were that flieth in the air. The likeness of never to raise our eyes to heaven and any thing that creepeth on the ground, contemplate the sun, moon, and stars, the likeness of any fish that is in the but rather to walk upon all fours for waters beneath the earth: Take heed ever.' The scope of the precept is eviunto yourselves, lest ye forget the co-dently to forbid the use of those imaged venant of the Lord your God, which he and pictured likenesses as representamade with you, and make you a graventions of the invisible God. The inten image, or the likeness of any thing which the Lord thy God hath forbidden thee.' It is not to be supposed from the unqualified language of the prohibition, that sculpture or painting as branches of the fine arts are forbidden, although the Jews have for the most part been restrained by this commandment from indulging themselves to any extent in the mimetic arts. On this subject the language of Michaelis (Comment. on the Laws of Moses, Art. 250) is worthy of being quoted; 'I know not how it has happened that several writers, and among them some men of real learning, have persuaded themselves, or have, without inquiry, asserted, one after another, that the Israelites were absolute, ly prohibited from making, or having any image whatever, even although it tion of the law is obvious from the rea son assigned for it, viz., that they had seen 'no manner of similitude' when God appeared and delivered the Deca, logue at Horeb. As he did not appear to them in any shape, so he ought not to be represented in any shape. But this reason does not hold against the mak ing graven images of men, beasts, birds, fishes, or reptiles, when they were not intended as representations of God, or to be used as objects or means of wor. ship. Accordingly Moses was expressly commanded to construct the figures of the Cherubim of the sculptured work for the Ark of the Covenant, Ex. 25, 18-20, and also the brazen serpent as an emblematic device to aid in the pro, duction of a salutary effect on the bodies of the bitten Israelites in the wilder. forbid all superstitious usages, all mere human inventions, in the matter of di. vine worship. The annexing of additions of our own to the institutions of heaven under the pretext of their being significant ceremonies calculated to excite devotion or better to promote the ends of worship, is nothing short of a bold innovation upon the prescribed worship of God. Deut. 12. 30, 'What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.' This principle accordingly condemns all such command in baptism, kneeling at the sacrament, erecting altars in churches, bowing at the name of Jesus, and other things of like nature, for which the Scriptures contain no express warrant. The bare adoption of such usages no doubt trenches in some degree upon the spirit of this commandment; but to insist upon them as terms of communion is nothing short of a downright invasion of the prerog. ative of the divine Lawgiver, and must incur his marked displeasure. In the minor circumstances of religious worship no doubt many things are left to be regulated by the dictates of human discretion, and in these the apostolic rule, 'let every thing be done decently and in order,' will always be a sufficient guide; but whenever this rule is made a plea for imposing things uncommand. ness, Num. 28. 8, 9. It is certain, moreover, that in the Temple of Solomon there was a great deal of sculptured work over the walls, as of flowers colocynths, palm-trees, cherubim, &c., and the brazen sea, it is well known rested upon twelve brazen oxen. In neither of these cases was there any infraction of the second commandment, because the design of these images did not come within the scope of its prohibition. But the making of the golden calf by the Israelites in the wilderness was in the most direct contravention of the letter and spirit of this precept, although pro-ed practices as signing with the cross fessedly set up in honor of the true God, and was what the Scriptures expressly call idolatry, Acts, 7. 41, 'They made a calf in those days and offered sacrifice unto the idol (Tw εidwλ).' 1 Cor. 10. 7, 'Neither be ye idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, The people sat down to eat, and to drink, and rose up to play.' In like manner when Jeroboam set up his calves of gold and proclaimed to the people, 'Behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of Egypt,' he was guilty of the very sin forbidden in the second commandment. That this was the idolatry condemned in this commandment, viz., worshipping the images of the true God, and not the worship of a false god, which is more especially pointed at in the first, is evident from this, that his sin is said to be less than the sin of worshipping the im-ed, then a plain infraction is made upon age of Baal, 1 Kings, 16. 31, where we read that it came to pass, as if it had been a light thing for Ahab to walk in the sins of Jeroboam that he went and served Baal and worshipped him;' and so in the language of the first commandment, 'had another god before Jehovah,' which Jeroboam had not, because he worshipped his idols as images of the true God. This we suppose to be a leading distinction between the first and second precept of the law. But the spirit ual import of this commandment reaches much farther. It goes unequivocally to the spirit of this precept.-T Graven image. Heb. O pesel, sculptile, any thing cut, graven, or carved, a statue, from the root pasal, to hew, to chip, to sculpture, whether wood or stone. Gr. eidwλov, an idol. Chal. ‘An image.' -¶ Likeness. Heb. temunah, likeness, similitude. The term is quite general in its import, carrying with it mainly the idea of resemblance, but whether this resemblance is the result of configuration or delineation is not determined by the word alone. As the previous term 30 pesel, more strictly 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them; for I the LORD thy God am a jealous fch. 23. 24. Josh. 23. 7. 2 Kings 17. 35. Isai. 44. 15, 19. 5 ch. 34. 14. Deut. 4. 24. & 6. 15. Josh. 24. 19. Neh. 1. 2. denotes statuary, it will no doubt be proper here to understand temunah of any kind of pictorial representation whether of real or fancied objects, which might serve as the instruments of worship. 5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them. Heb. 3 2 3 lo tishtahaveh lahem, shalt not do obeisance to them. Gг.oν пρskvvnoɛis avrois, shall not worship them, a term applied to those bodily gestures, such as bowing, kneeling, falling prostrate, &c., which are used as tokens of special reverence and respect. See Note on Gen. 18.2. Though they might not make nor have such images themselves or in their own country, yet possibly they might see them in passing through other lands, in which case they were required carefully to refrain from bowing down to them, or using any gesture which might be construed into an act of religious reverence, or as in any degree countenancing a practice so expressly forbidden. ¶ Nor serve them. Heb. an taobdem. Gr. μn λarpevσeis avrois, nor do homage to them. If they were forbidden to make or to acknowledge by the most casual outward gesture any such images, much less were they to go so far as to serve them, or unite with those that did, either by offering sacrifice, burning incense, pouring out libations, making vows, building altars, consecrating temples, or any other act of equivalent import. The spirit of this second commandment, like that of the whole Decalogue, is plainly exceeding broad.' It is undoubtedly implied that in paying our devotion to the true God we are not to employ any image or likeness for the 6 God, h visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; h ch. 34. 7. Lev. 20. 5. & 26. 39, 40. Numb. 14. 18, 33. 1 Kings 21. 29. Job 5. 4. & 21. 19. Ps. 79. 8. & 109. 4. Isai. 14. 20, 21. & 65. 6, 7. Jer. 2. 9. & 32. 18. purpose of directing, exciting, or assisting that devotion. Though it were worship designed to terminate in God, yet its being offered through such a medium would divest it of all its acceptableness in his sight. Guided solely by the dic tates of our erring reason, we might suppose that the aid of bodily sense might be called in to assist our mental vision, and that the use of images, paintings, crucifixes, and other outward symbols might at least be harmless, if not positively beneficial in refreshing the memory and quickening our devotions. But God knows the downward and deteriorating tendency of our nature even in its best estate, and he sees that the employment of outward symbols of worship would gradually tend to lower the standard of pious feeling and finally to withdraw the mind from the ultimate spiritual object, and fix it upon the gross sensible medium. We have only to look at the history of the Greek and Latin churches for an abundant confirmation of this view of the subject. How palpable is it that the standard of a pure and spiritual worship is there most sadly and fearfully degraded? that the spirit of devotion has been lost in that of downright idolatry? From crosses and relics they proceeded to images and pictures, not only of God and Christ, and the Holy Ghost, but of the virgin and of saints and martyrs without number; until those beings, and the paintings or carvings which represented them, originally designed as mere intercessors and aids to devotion, became, at least to the more ignorant, actual objects of wor ship. Now and then an individual may perhaps be found exhibiting a depth and fervor of pious feeling that has resisted wretch that Venāsi is! alas for his posall these untoward influences. But in terity, great will be their sufferings.' the general, what superstition, what 'Evil one, why are you going on in this profanation, what mockery, under the way; have you no pity for your seed?' name of worship there prevail? For- 'Alas! alas! I am now suffering for the giveness of sin by human authority, the sins of my fathers.' When men enjoy withholding the Bible from the people, many blessings, it is common to say of and the grossest immorality among large them, 'Yes, yes, they are enjoying the portions of the priesthood are among the good deeds of their fathers.' 'The prosfruits known and read of all men, of the perity of my house arises from the vir practical violation of the second com- tues of my forefathers.' In the Scanda mandment. For I the Lord thy Purāna it is recorded, 'The soul is subGod am a jealous God, &c. We have ject to births, deaths, and sufferings. thus far considered the precept of the It may be born on the earth, or in the Second Commandment; the words be- sea. It may also appear in ether, fire, fore us bring us to its sanction. This or air. Souls may be born as men, as is drawn from the nature of God, and beasts or birds, as grass or trees, as the words very strikingly exhibit the mountains or gods.' By these we are peculiar feeling with which Jehovah re- reminded of the question, 'Who did sin, gards all rivalry in the affections and this man or his parents, that he was homage of his subjects. This feeling born blind?' 'Jesus answered, Neither is here called 'jealousy,' implying a hath this man sinned, nor his parents.' peculiar sensitiveness to every thing Roberts. To visit iniquity is to punish that threatens to trench upon the honor, it; and we have here the announcement reverence, and esteem that he knows to of a general principle of the divine adbe due to himself. The term will ap-ministration or an established ordering pear still more significant if it be borne of providence, viz., that the effects both in mind that idolatry in the Scriptures of obedience and disobedience, or blessis frequently spoken of as spiritual adul-ings and curses, remain for a long time tery, and as 'jealousy is the rage of a man,' so nothing can more fitly express the divine indignation against this sin than the term in question. Those sentiments therefore which are naturally awakened by the infidelity and treachery of an espoused wife towards her husband are strongly appealed to by the use of this language.- -T Visiting the iniquity of the fathers, &c. 'It is universally believed that children suffer for the iniquities of their ancestors, through many generations. I wonder why Tamban's son was born a cripple?' -'You wonder! why, that is a strange thing; have you not heard what a vile man his grandfather was?' 'Have you heard that Valen has had a son, and that he is born blind?' I did not hear of it, but this is another of a former birth.' proof of the sins after the original actors are no more. Universal history and experience clearly go to show that this is a distinguishing character of the divine economy, and the sentence is shielded from all charge of injustice by the terms in which it is couched unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me ;' from which it is obvious that the children were not to be thus punished for the sins of their fathers irrespective of their own conduct and deserts. The tokens of the divine displeasure were to flow along the line of those who continued the haters of God, as all idolaters are plainly considered by implication to be. This sense of the passage is distinctly recognized in the Chal. version; 'I the Lord thy God am a jealous God visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the transgressing children, unto the third |