themselves from the presence," or face, " of the Lord. God among the trees of the garden." Does not this intimate that before their fall they had been accustomed to some visible presence of Jehovah, and to a voice issuing from this presence; which voice they no sooner hear in their naked, lapsed condition, than they shrink from that presence, which before they met with rapture? Might not this visible appearance or symbol of Deity be the same with the cherubims and flaming sword, or rather sword like flame, which were afterward stationed without the garden? A former Hebrew professor of this university remarks, that the original seems to convey this idea by prefixing the emphatic article the to cherubims and sword like flame. Accordingly he renders the text thus-" So he drove out the man, and placed the cherubims and the flaming sword at the east of the garden &c." This naturally implies, that before man's expulsion these symbols had a different station, perhaps in the middle of the garden, where they might be a standing token of God's favorable presence, to which innocent man might resort for the purposes of religious worship and instruction. As cherubims, and a luminous, often a flaming cloud were afterwards the appointed symbol of Jehovah's presence, we are led by analogy to suppose that they might be so to Adam, who in the infancy of his being needed such a sensible mode of instruction. And as these symbols were placed without the gates of paradise, when man was banished from it, so their new station might be designed not only to prevent his reentrance into that happy abode, but to hold out a continued token of God's gracious presence, or to show that man, though barred from the tree of life in Eden, might still have access to and intercoure with his Maker. This hypothesis

of an early and stated symbol of the divine presence is confirmed by many passages in the sacred history; particularly by the story of Cain and Abel.

As one main object of these lectures is to explain and recommend the Jewish scriptures; so I cannot place thenarrative ofthese two brothers in so satisfactory a light, as by giving you the ingenious comment of the learned Hebrecian just mentioned. The text informs us that "in process of time Cain and Abel brought their offerings to the Lord." The phrase, "brought an offering to the Lord," indicates that the invisible, omnipresent Jehovah did, in that period of the world, visibly manifest himself in some particular place; to which all religious oblations were brought. The original expression, here obscurely rendered "in process of time," may be justly interpreted, " at the end of the year;" that is, probably at the same season of the year, in which the great anniversary atonement was afterwards prescribed and performed under the law; for many of the Jewish rites were but new editions or copies of the patriarchal usages. We hence see the reason why Cain's offering was not accepted. It was not of the expiatory and animal kind, which was appointed for this season. His proud spirit felt no need of expiation for sin; and being a tiller of the ground, he chose to bring an offering of his own produce, rather than be indebted to his younger brother, who was a shepherd, for an animal victim. Cain having shown his resentment at the divine preference of Abel's offering, Jehovah thus addresses him "Why art thou wroth? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." This passage in our translation is not only obscure, and too figurative for

simple narration, but, as our author shows, does vio lence, in one instance, to the grammar of the original. He therefore gives the following version as more literal and probable" If thou doest well, hast thou not the preeminence? and if thou doest not well, there is a sin offering lying down at the door. And unto thee is his desire, and thou rulest over him." This short passage, thus rendered, intimates the following things. 1. That there was then a tabernacle or tent, where the symbol of God's presence resided, where offerings were presented, and where Jehovah now conversed with Cain. 2. That Cain, being only a cultivator of land, must have been obliged to Abel for an oblation suited to the season. 3. That there were then animals lying at the door of the tabernacle; and 4. that though these belonged to Abel, yet he would readily yield them on this occasion to an elder brother, to whose superiority he cheerfully submitted. The sense therefore of God's address to Cain may be thus expressed-" If thy conduct be good, thou hast a native right to preeminence. And if thy conduct has been wrong, there is still room for an expiatory sacrifice; animals proper for a sin offering are now lying down at the door; of these thou mayest freely take; for thy brother, whose property they are, is cordially subject to thee."

The sequel of this story is well known. Cain having persisted in proud impiety and malignity, and having murdered his brother, was banished from "the presence, and hid from the face" of Jehovah, that is, from the visible symbol of his presence, and place of his worship; the consequence of which was, that he and his posterity had no appearance of religion; on which account his female descendants are styled "the daughters of men," that is

1

merely human and earthly beings; while the offspring of Seth, who enjoyed God's visible presence and worship, aré called the sons of God.".

This idea of God's visible intercourse with good men from the beginning, is also favored by the account of his interviews with Enoch, Noah, and others; of their

66

coming to him, and walking with him ;" which implies sensible intercourse, like that of two friends walking together. During the patriarchal period, when Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were sojourners in Canaan, the symbol of the divine presence removed with them from one station to another; as it afterwards did with the Israelites during their marches and encampments in the wilderness. We accordingly read of frequent appearances of Jehovah to Abraham in the different places, where he resided. We are also told that God appeared to Jacob, as he was going, with his family, into Egypt, and assured him "that he would go with him and bring him up again," that is, that he would accompany and reside with Israel in that country, by the visible symbol of his presence.

Having thus proved in general from reason, scripture, and analogy, that God manifested himself to men both before and under the law, in a sensible and local manner; let us now more distinctly inquire into the nature of this manifestation. It is styled by the sacred writers the presence, the face, the countenance, the name, and the glory of the Lord. By later authors it is called the Schechinah, that is, the dwelling or tabernacling of God with men. That we may rightly conceive of it, let us attend a few moments to the structure and furniture of the Jewish tabernacle or temple, and then to the manner, in which Jehovah manifested himself in this sacred habitation.

ន

The tabernacle was a moveable tent, erected in the wilderness; the temple was a stationary and magnificent building erected by Solomon. As both had the same nature and use, a description of either will give us the true design of both.

Some eminent writers have contended, that temples had their origin in heathen countries, and that Jehovah condescended to gratify the taste of the Hebrews, by setting up among them a religious fabric resembling, yet far exceeding in splendor any of the idol temples. But the Scriptures assign a very different origin and intention to the Jewish tabernacle and temple of the Jews. They represent each of them as designed for the visible palace of Jehovah, as king of that chosen nation. They represent each, as constructed, not with any reference to, nor after the model of heathen temples, but by the sole direction of God, and according to the exact pattern delineated by him. And though Strabo describes the antient Egyptian temples, as bearing some similitude to that at Jerusalem; this fact is easily solved by supposing, that skilful architects of the former emulated the incomparable structure of the latter. The Hebrew tabernacle and temple were built of the richest materials. Each was divided into two apartments; the outer room was called the holy place; the inner the holy of holies. The former was furnished with the table of shew bred, the candlestick or lamp, and the altar of incense, all of pure gold. These utensils not only suited the notion of a house, in which the King of Israel dwelt; but the table of bread, of which his ministers and the people's representatives partook, denoted God's favor to and communion. with Israel, as his favorite guests, his covenant people; .the altar of incense fitly represented the ascent and accep