felt a kind of awe, and realized, in a manner that we never perhaps could feel elsewhere, how perfectly every tittle of God's word is carried out. . . These cities of Moab, which are still so perfect that they might again be inhabited to-morrow, have been during many centuries unpeopled. The land about them, rich and fruitful as any in Syria, has long ceased to produce aught but shrubs and herbs, the food of the camel and the antelope."*

If Um-el-Jemâl may be taken as a specimen of the numerous cities on the south which come in view from Sulkhad, we gain an impressive conception not only of the Moabite kingdom at this time, but also of the previous opulence of the Hebrew tribes who had owned this territory and occupied these cities, while at the same time they had exercised rule, as lords paramount, over the Moab and Edomite communities in their neighbourhood. Let us fix our attention steadfastly on their numbers and extent, on the ample resources of their vast provinces, and then connect with this view of them the strong fortresses on the north, which were held by their compatriots, and our conceptions of the national importance of the Israelites, and of the fitness of the ground chosen for the transactions of their great history, will be indefinitely heightened. This ground was over its whole extent, what the highland country on the other side of the Jordan valley was only in its choicest provinces. Rich streams of commerce were continually pouring through the cities built on it, as they flowed on from the Red Sea ports to Damascus and Palmyra, or again from the west, through Bozra, along the road which, as we have seen, led thence to the Persian Gulf. Here, on those broad and fertile pastures, on those richly-wooded hills, beside those sparkling streams, with those great highways running through their cities, was the richest portion of Israel's inheritance. Here some of the most momentous parts of its "mission in the world" were to be fulfilled. Provinces like these were needed for the development of some of the characteristics of the Hebrew nature, for the fulfilment of some of its appointed work. And the entire significance of the history of the chosen people cannot be understood, if they are not distinctly taken into account in our survey of the scene where that history was carried forward.

In this point of view all these regions are full of the deepest interest, and we may gladly welcome the recent additions to our knowledge respecting them. Another use of them is found in the illustrations which they furnish of some of the predictive portions of scripture; but this use must be made in a method differing from that which has been customary. And it must be borne in mind, that we rather infer the fulfilment of

Camb. Essays for 1858. See also Jour. Geog. Soc. Vol. xxviii. p. 250-252.

those predictions from the general aspect of the country, than actually witness it in what is seen by us. This distinction will go far to remove many of the difficulties which have recently been suggested (as in Stanley's Sinai and Pales., chap. vi.) in respect of the uses which some expositors of prophecy have made of the actual condition of Scripture Lands as illustrative of the inspired predictions. Let it be granted that the ruins and desolations we now look upon are not those which were in view of the inspired seer-and this must be acknowledged, for they betoken the overthrow of races far later than those to whom his denunciations were addressed-yet his words are illustriously verified by them. The existing ruins imply, or we may say they exhibit, the very overthrow which he predicted. As we have already intimated, much of that massive ponderous architecture which we assign to those early days the Scriptures speak of, does not meet us on the surface: the works of later ages are superimposed on them. The Roman builders, for example, who afterwards wrought here, frequently erected their princely structures on what was a field of ruins when their works were carried forward; and in those ruins, the waste and desolation amidst which their temples and palaces and theatres were raised by them, we discern the fulfilment of the inspired predictions. We think there is reason to regret that commentators on prophecy have not observed this distinction; an element of weakness will be withdrawn from their argument when it is regarded.

For their use, as well as for the help of those who apply themselves to the embodiment and vivification of the history of Scripture, abundant materials are supplied by these late researches upon ground which was formerly almost unknown. It is true that, at present, it has only been roughly and generally surveyed, and indeed more than this has been hitherto impossible. Travel in some parts of this country is still impracticable, and it cannot be accomplished in any part except with risk and peril. It is now overrun by the most lawless of the Bedouins, and for many generations it will be liable to their incursions. As the "corsairs of the wilderness," they will hang upon its coasts for a long period. But under that improved government of Syria, which cannot be delayed much longer, the land itself must be reclaimed from them, and the traveller will be as secure against these outrages as he is now in western Palestine. Those roads which run directly through their territory show that their ancestors were tamed, or at least made amenable to discipline, as indeed the present generation of them was, in a large measure, during the late Egyptian occupation of the country.

When this is again the case, and the country is thrown open to the deliberate inspection of observers, duly accom

plished and gifted like those we have above named, we shall have its history revived, as that has been which was transacted in the familiar scenes of Judæa and Samaria. And thus will be completed a proof overwhelming in its power of demonstration on him who duly investigates it, that the sacred writers wrote what they knew, and testified what they had seen; and that no historical record in our possession is more authentic than that through which we have received the Revelation of the mind and will of God.

DR. SMITH'S DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; AND HIS
CONTRIBUTORS.

We have received from the Rev. Samuel Clark the following letter, which, desiring to give him no ground of complaint, we print as we received it :

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

Battersea, Nov. 20, 1860. SIR,-Your reviewer of Dr. Smith's Biblical Dictionary has thought it worth while to select my article on the Day of Atonement for stern rebuke, and has given three quotations from it on which he mainly grounds his charges. As I cannot help thinking that his treatment of the article is peculiar, I trust that you will give me space for a statement which shall be as short as I can make it.

The opinion of Origen, Spencer, Gesenius, Ewald, and Hengstenberg, noticed in the first passage-that the Hebrew word Azazel is the name of a personal being, to whom the scape-goat was sent away, is indeed stated at some length. But objections to that opinion, which I regard as valid, are also stated. In the next section, the interpretation of the word is given which appears to me to be most probable, and which is approved by Drs. Thomson and Tholuck. According to it, the inscription on the lot of the scape-goat signified, "for complete sending away."

Philo's view of the Day of Atonement, referred to in the second quotation, is called "nobler:" not as being a complete or true one, but as compared with the notions of the Talmudists mentioned in the preceding paragraph.

For the third quotation I have neither apology nor explanation to offer. It expresses the only meaning of the white garments and bodily purification of the high priest with which I am acquainted. I would, however, ask that it should be read, together with the reviewer's remarks, in connection with the concluding passage of the article. After giving the arguments in favour of taking the two goats as figures of one and the same substance, and stating that Cyril and others have applied this view so as to make one goat represent the death of Christ, and the other His resurrection, the paragraph proceeds :-" But we "shall take a simpler, and perhaps a truer view, if we look upon the

"slain goat as setting forth the act of sacrifice, in giving up its own life "for others to Jehovah,' in accordance with the requirements of the "divine law; and the goat which carried off its load of sin for complete removal,' as signifying the cleansing influence of faith in that "sacrifice. Thus, in his degree, the devout Israelite might have felt "the truth of the psalmist's words, As far as the east is from the "west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us.' But for us the whole spiritual truth has been revealed in historical fact, in "the life, death, and resurrection of Him who was made sin for us, "who died for us, and who rose again for our justification. This "Mediator it was necessary should, in some unspeakable manner, "unite life and death.'"*

Then follows a list of nine books, of which I made principal use in the composition of the article. Of these two only are modern German works and from neither of them am I conscious of having derived any "follies of German interpretation," with which the article is said to be largely intermixed. I believe that I have not adopted a single opinion which is peculiar to either of them.-I am, Sir, your obedient servant, SAMUEL CLARK.

We feel no inclination for a war of words with Mr. Clark, and shall therefore leave his explanations to have their full weight with our readers. We feared, on our first perusal of the paper in question, that Mr. Clark was a follower of Mr. F. D. Maurice. We drew this conclusion, not merely from his reference to that author, but from that mistiness and indistinctness-that apparent but not real recognition of fundamental truths-which pervades all the writings of Mr. Maurice, and from which Mr. Clark's article on the Day of Atonement is not altogether free. Let our readers examine carefully the passage to which Mr. Clark appeals in his own justification, as given above, and they will see how nearly we may approach the truth, without actually touching it.

However, we have the assurance of those on whom we can rely, that Mr. Clark is a sound and pious divine; and we rejoice to hear it. Other excellent men, some of whom occasionally write in the Christian Observer, have also contributed papers to Dr. Smith's dictionary. As it was intended only "to comprise antiquities, biography, geography, and natural history," we are by no means surprised they should have done so. Some of them have written to us to say that they wish to be held responsible only for their own contributions. But we must suggest to them that something more is due, both to their own characters and to the cause of truth, than explanations addressed to the editor of the Christian Observer. They must send their indignant remonstrance, not to us, but to the editor of Dr. Smith's dictionary. They must publish this remonstrance to the world. And they must do it in such out-spoken terms as to make the

*These eight words are taken from Maurice on Sacrifice, p. 85.

public understand that their indignation bears some proportion to the mischief they have innocently been promoting. We should have thought Mr. Clark's explanation more satisfactory, if he had wound up with a sentence or two to this effect.

But the subject is too solemn, and the interests at stake are too important, for us to permit it to degenerate into a personal affair. We must seize the occasion to re-open, to a certain extent, the questions at issue between ourselves and the friends and followers of Mr. Maurice.

Let it be remembered, that Mr. Maurice himself asserts and maintains a doctrine of the Atonement,-speaks of Christ's sacrifice, acknowledges that Christ died for us, was made sin for us, and offered Himself to the Father for us; and yet, with all this, Mr. Maurice utterly rejects that doctrine of the Atonement which the Bible teaches, and which the church constantly maintains. And what Mr. Clark's letter, as given above, is chiefly deficient in, is, a clear and distinct avowal, whether he holds with Mr. Maurice, or with the Bible and the church.

I. Mr. Maurice tells us, in his Theological Essays, "I must give up archbishop Magee; for I am determined to keep that which makes the Atonement precious to my heart and conscience."

Now, whether Mr. Maurice chooses to keep to archbishop Magee, or to give him up, may be of small importance. But the archbishop's name here stands for a certain DOCTRINE which Mr. Maurice says he "must give up."

II. What, then, is this doctrine which Mr. Maurice thus rejects? We will give it in the archbishop's own words :—

"As the Atonement under the Law, or expiation of the legal transgressions, was represented as a translation of those transgressions, in the act of sacrifice in which the animal was slain, and the people thereby cleansed from their legal impurities, and released from the penalties which had been incurred;-so, the great Atonement for the sins of mankind was to be effected by the sacrifice of Christ, undergoing, for the restoration of men to the favour of God, that death which had been denounced against sin; and which He suffered in like manner as if the sins of men had been actually transferred to Him, as those of the congregation had been symbolically transferred to the sin-offering of the people." (Abp. Magee on the Atonement, Vol. i., p. 62.)

III. Such is the doctrine which Mr. Maurice "gives up," or rejects. Now, let us quote, in his own words, some of his reasons for so giving it up. In his Theological Essays he

says:

"If we speak of Christ as taking upon Himself the sins of men by some artificial substitution, we deny that He is their actual representative."