but, if he died in a state of impenitency, we have as much reason to say that he never had any true religion as that he had fallen from it;" and that “ we cannot accurately know the hearts and moral state of persons, neither at the time of their falling into sin nor afterwards." It is true we cannot, and for this reason we ought to speak cautiously, and seriously pause before we pronounce on the destinies of the dead. But in reference to Solomon we think it is sufficiently clear, in the first place, that he was once a godly man, in a state of saving grace, and enjoyed the divine favour. Secondly, it is quite clear that he fell from that state; the time and circumstances of his apostacy are accurately stated by the inspired historian. And, thirdly, it is admitted on all hands that we are not furnished with any satisfactory proof of his restoration.

1. In our opinion, Scripture furnishes us with clear and indubitable evidence of Solomon's piety. He was a godly man, in a state of salvation. It is true that we are now here furnished with the particulars of his conversion to God, any more than we are with such circumstantials respecting many other great and good men who lived and "died in the faith." We can only judge of his moral and religious character by reading his life and conduct. And what is said by the sacred historian concerning him? We are informed that "Solomon was named Jedidiah," which signifies "beloved of the Lord." 2 Sam. xii. 25. It is also said that "he loved the Lord, and walked in the statutes of his father David." If David is to be believed. God said unto him, "Solomon thy son, he shall build my house and my courts: for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his Father." 1 Chron. xxviii. 6. And as

God chose him, and recognised him as standing in the endearing relationship of a son, so "the Lord his God was with him, and magnified him exceedingly." 2 Chron. i. 1. In the same chapter it is said, "In that night did God appear to him, and said unto him, Ask what I shall give thee." And Solomon said, "Give me now wisdom and knowledge; and the speech pleased the Lord," &c. From these passages, it is evident that Solomon had communion with the Lord. But it may be said, All this relates merely to his throne, and the building of the temple, and affords no proof of his spirituality, or the religious state of his mind. We think such a conclusion is very rash; especially so when we further consider the character of his religious worship, which on several occasions was spiritual and powerful. Read the sixth chapter of second Chronicles, and judge whether that prayer is not the effusion of an enlightened and pious mind, especially the conclusion : "Now, my God, let, I beseech thee, thine eyes be open, and let thine ears be attent unto the prayer that is made in this place. Now therefore arise, O Lord God, into thy resting place, thou, and the ark of thy strength; let thy priests, O Lord God, be clothed with salvation, and let thy saints rejoice in goodness. O Lord God, turn not away the face of thine anointed: remember the mercies of David thy servant." But it may be said, Though this prayer is very solemn, and the words indicative of pious thoughts, we have not sufficient proof that they proceeded from a good heart and a sound mind. Many prayers which contain holy and reverential thoughts, and words, and phrases of a devotional character, are not accompanied with true sincerity and living faith. This, we fear, is in many cases

true. But Solomon's prayer was offered up in spirit and in truth, in the beauty of holiness, and as such was acceptable to God; hence He manifested his approbation and glory: "Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifice; and the glory of the Lord filled the house, and the priests could not enter into the house of the Lord, because the glory of the Lord had filled the Lord's house." 2 Chron. vii. 1. Now, I maintain that the above facts prove, as far as external evidence goes, that Solomon was a pious man. What should we think of a man in our day, who should devote all his influence, time, money, and talents to the promotion and establishment of true religion; who should, in addition to this, exercise at the public means of grace, surrounded by the highest ecclesiastical functionaries in the kingdom; if, in connection with his public prayers, the divine influence were so powerfully to descend as to fill the place with the glory of God, &c.--who would question the piety of such an individual? Who would presume that his religion was merely in form, and that "in reality he was not a godly man?" We could scarcely find a man making any pretensions to sober religion, who would come to such a conclusion; and if we could meet with such an individual, we should regard him as an uncharitable bigot. Now, when Solomon ascended the throne of Judea, or immediately subsequent to that event, he was a man of practical piety, powerful in prayer, &c.; and consequently we infer he was a godly man, lived in the fear of the Lord, and enjoyed true religion.

2. From that state he fell.

He apostatised, and

became a very wicked man. The cause and facts relative to his fall are clearly stated, and consequently we have nothing to imagine or conjecture. He first became licentious, and then idolatrous: "King Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharoah, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites." He transgressed the law of God relative to marriage; and what was the consequence? Such as might be expected: "It came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father." 1 Kings xi. 1-6. Whatever the faults, and failings, and sins of David might have been, he never turned polytheist, or gave the least countenance to idolatry. In this respect his heart was ever "perfect with the Lord his God." But Solomon sunk into the most abominable idolatry, and introduced polytheistic worship even in Jerusalem and throughout the country of Judea. 1 Kings xi. 7-10. Therefore there is nothing problematic in reference to his apostacy; and if there is no evidence of his restoration, we have strong reason to conclude that his fall was final-seeing, as we have before proved, that such a fall is possible, and that "Solomon when he was old, turned away his heart after other gods." He "changed back again," and did not "go on to the very rest in heaven." But

3. Was Solomon ever restored to the favour of God and a state of salvation? This is a very important question, and differently answered by men of different views. Some of those divines who advocate the doctrine of final perseverance, and the impossibility of finally falling from

grace, say: "We have evidence of his restoration in the book of Ecclesiastes," which they suppose he wrote in his old age, when he was reclaimed from his backslidings. On this hypothesis we remark

(1.) It is almost certain that Solomon was the author of this book. This is generally admitted, both by Jews and Christians. It exhibits marks of Solomon's manner of writing; and in the first verse of the book he says, "The words of the preacher, the son of David, king of Jerusalem." But, supposing it were granted that Solomon was the author of it, and that he wrote it subsequently to his apostacy, which I think is very probable, it may be asked: (2.) Does it contain sufficient spirituality and holiness of thought to prove that he was restored to a state of saving grace? We think not. And in this opinion we are not singular. Dr. Tomline, late Bishop of Winchester, says: "The book of Ecclesiastes, though of the didactic kind, differs from the preceding book, inasmuch as it seems to be confined to one single subject, namely, vanity." "It is very difficult to distinguish the arrangement and connection of the parts of this work; and there is so little elevation or dignity in its language, that the Rabbins will not allow it to be reckoned among the poetical books of Scripture." If Solomon wrote it a little before his death, which is very questionable, it is a proof that he was not a true penitent. There are many wise and true sayings respecting the vanity of all earthly things, and what constitutes man's chief good, namely, the fear of the Lord and keeping his commandments; and the design of the Almighty in causing the book to be written was evidently to teach these important lessons. But if Solomon had