favoured of God, his loyal people. The first act of his reign over the united tribes, was the besieging of Jebus, or Jerusalem, the citadel of which, called Zion, had hitherto remained in the possession of the Jebusites. That stronghold was soon taken by that successful warrior, who never lost a battle; and as the city was conveniently situated in the boundaries of Judah and Benjamin, and in the territory of both, it became the metropolis of the kingdom. Here the royal monarch took up his residence; and upon the sacred hill of Zion, where Abraham's faith was about to offer his son Isaac ages before, built his royal and magnificent palace. Here, in that palace, built upon that holy hill, he erected his throne, or visible kingly seat, "for there were set the thrones of judgment, the thrones of the house of David." It was upon the throne in this palace that he sat dispensing justice and judgment to his people, and ruling over them with his mild and merciful sceptre.

That David had in his palace a throne, or magnificent kingly seat, upon which he appeared in royal attire on certain occasions before the heads, the nobles, and rulers of the people, and for the performance of certain regal duties, admits not of doubt, for such was the custom of the East; and such thrones, or seats, in those days, as well as in the present, had all eastern kings. It were strange, indeed, if David had been an exception from this universal kingly custom, and if while all other kings had their thrones, he had

not his! Nor is this made certain merely by eastern habits, but more especially by the sure word of God, which clearly teaches that David had, and did occupy a throne. Again and again, does Scripture make mention of that throne, and abounds with evidence, that while he sat upon that throne he exercised a literal and visible rule over the privileged, the glorious, and far-renowned people of God. The same evidence, also, conclusively proves that this was the only throne which David ever occupied. He never had, he never sat upon another. He never sat king upon any other throne, or any other kind of throne than this.

And doubtless this throne, which was the throne of Israel to which David was raised by divine and immediate interposition, as we have seen, was the most noble and honourable of all earthly thrones, and shall be had in delightful and everlasting remembrance, when all others have crumbled into dust, and been buried in hoary oblivion; for it was the throne of Jerusalem, the city of the great king; the throne of the most distinguished and exalted people, the people of Israel, the chosen nation of the Lord, "to whom pertained the adoption, and the covenants, and the promises." Upon that literal throne, the throne of God's chosen people, Israel, David literally sat; and over that people and kingdom he literally reigned three and thirty years, as history, both sacred and profane, clearly testifies.

Now, let this important truth be kept in remembrance, that that throne upon which David sat was a literal, visible, material throne, in Jerusalem; that the kingdom over which he reigned was a literal kingdom upon earth, the territory of Judea, in Asia Minor, whose boundaries are as distinctly defined as those of any other earthly kingdom; and that the Israelites, who were the privileged subjects of his government, were a literal people. Of the literality of all these no doubt can be entertained, neither can any arguments. be adduced to disprove it. With as much rationality might we doubt the literality of any kingly throne now upon the earth, or of the government existing in the present day in any of the old doomed dynasties of Europe. This throne, then, upon which David sat and ruled God's elect nation, was doubtless, according to the proof already adduced, a literal throne, and was, as we have already seen, the only throne upon which he ever sat or possessed. The idea of his occupying a spiritual throne, or ruling or reigning spiritually in the hearts of the people of Israel, is so preposterous and absurd, and we might add blasphemous withal, if it ever entered into any mind, that it is unworthy of a grave reply. It was, then, of the literal throne of Israel in Jerusalem upon which David sat that the angel Gabriel, speaking by the Holy Ghost, said, and the declaration must ever be regarded as the words of soberness, and truth, and inspiration, the words of God himself: "The Lord God shall give

unto the Son of the Highest," Jesus Christ, "the throne of his father David."

Here, then, we have, from the lips of the divinelycommissioned Gabriel, a solemn promise to the Virgin Mary, that the Lord God would give to the Son to whom she was to give birth the throne of David. Now, as to the fulfilment of the prediction and promise no doubt can be entertained. They must, they will be fulfilled, for the Lord's word shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure. He will not alter nor change the thing that has gone out of his mouth. Though the time of fulfilment should seem to tarry, yet it will come, and come too at the set time, for God cannot forget nor disavow his promise, neither can he break or profane his covenant. The question, then, is not, Will the Lord fulfil his promise; will he give to the Son of the Virgin, Jesus Christ, the throne of his father David? the question is, How will he do it? Shall this prediction and covenant be spiritually or literally fulfilled? Shall Christ sit spiritually and reign spiritually; or shall he sit literally and reign literally upon his father David's throne?

The question just proposed is a very important one, and, in some respects, a difficult one to be satisfactorily answered, because men of learning, piety, and talents are to be found on each side, and advocating with equal zeal the opposing views. Some contend that the prediction will be spiritually, some that it will be literally fulfilled. This is a subject that has been

keenly debated since the days of Origen, the great and perhaps first allegorist, and the debate is not yet ended, for interpreters of the Scriptures are yet propounding and endeavouring to prove as scriptural their conflicting views.

Those who contend for the spiritual interpretation of the passage, deny, that Jesus Christ will ever sit personally, that is, as God-man, in glorified humanity upon the rebuilt throne of his father David, and reign. visibly in Jerusalem over the house of Jacob, or Heaven's highly-favoured people, Israel; or that he will ever appear in person a reigning king upon the earth; and maintain that he will only sit spiritually, and reign spiritually, upon David's throne, and have in them and over them a spiritual kingdom; they maintain that Christ will not be upon earth, will not have any visible throne upon earth, will not be a visible reigning king upon earth, but that he will reign only by his Spirit in the hearts of his people. Now that Jesus Christ will reign spiritually over his people by his Holy Spirit working by his mighty influences in their hearts is incontrovertibly a truth, and a very important and glorious truth too; but it may be, yes it has been questioned, whether it is the truth taught in the prediction; and that is the consideration which now demands attention.

Now, to persuade the unprejudiced mind that this is the meaning of the passage, in all fairness it must be shown, that David had a spiritual throne; that he