become involved in the business; and, seeing how easily a little money is made' they adopt the method, and add to the number of charity lecches.

And who can help it? People do not administer their own gifts, but send applicants to their pet charity to "have their cases inquired into." In this way they hope to avoid fraud, but it is the best course to promote it. None but the impudent succeed in getting anything from the leading societies. He who can tell a good story and never waver, is pretty sure to succeed; thus the old hands get most. The honest man and woman who are in distress could tell their story plainly enough to some generous man, who in kindness and patience would sit to listen to them, but cannot get on when they are up" before the "gentlemen" or officials of the society. The official air and manner confuses, appals, and makes them contradict themselves; when, of course, so vigilant are the mechanical workers, their case is hopeless. Even when soup, bread, or coals, are to be given away, they who are not accustomed to go for it are overcome when the place is reached, and hopelessly they stand waiting until all is gone. The old hands-the well-trained, never fail; but, as a general rule, they who stood in need and really deserved something go empty away. Thus the mechanical charity system labours under the double disadvantage of exhausting such funds as the generous have at their disposal, and of not finding out those who should receive a bounty. They are the means of keeping the generous rich away from the suffering poor; they prevent, through what they receive, many kindly souls from doing good; and yet, although costing a large sum for working, they are incapable of doing it themselves. Hence it has been my constant advice to every man who has charity to bestow that, as in the performance of some sacred duty towards God and man, he shall seek out a fitting recipient. Give unto him, and mix words of gentle warning, of kindly advice, with the coin. In that way the charitable penny will become fruitful in more ways than one, and there will be no danger of nursing and developing a brood of serpents, who will operate most prejudicially upon the industrial poor. I grant, and am proud to know, that, as a body, the working-classes of England have a spirit above living upon charity; still there is none the less need for avoiding all practices which result in setting up men as examples before them to show how easy it is, through lying and playing the hypocrite, to obtain a better supply than they can who win bread through labour.

(To be concluded in our next.)

HUMAN FREEDOM AND DIVINE LAW.

SIN and sorrow, love and hate, human passion, and human suffering, are the burthen of the World-tale. In the hurrying crowds of our great cities, in the busy market-places, beneath the humble roof of the villager, and in the kingly palace-wherever man is, proof may be found that human life is a mingled yarn, in which the bright hues of love and joy are ever crossed by the dark-coloured woof of vice and crime, sorrow and sadness. Now in the world around us, in these current months, it is so; and look where we may in the long records of past time, the same old tale is told. It is dreamiers only who speak of Golden Ages when these were not; history knows of none such. And, were it not that we know of a certainty that there is a profound truth in the saying that "all things work together for good," the contemplation of the records of man's doings and sufferings would be the

saddest possible. The fact that so much of pain and misery, vice and crime, occupy the pages of history, has ever possessed a strange fascination for many minds. Poets have sung their jeremiads, preachers have sermonised, and philosophers have theorised over it, with strange results. If it had been recollected that innocence is not virtue, that it is only through temptation, and the successful resistance thereto, that real virtue comes; if the truth had been borne in mind, that he who finally conquers in the great strife with the evil forces, even though he may have fallen more than once ere he conquered, is a more honourable man, and likelier to be a useful member of society, than he who has never entered on the contest, or been put to the proof, juster views on this matter would have occupied the pages of moralists, and wiser legislation would have appeared in our statute books. Wise teaching and efforts at reformation would have governed our jurisprudence, instead of the organised systems of vengeance, which, too frequently, have passed for justice. Our preachers, too, would have had more of the spirit of Christ, who came to call sinners to repentance, and who never thought to trouble himself to preach sermons to the righteous. Nor would the wild theories, as to freewill and necessity, human depravity, and Divine free grace, have found such ardent supporters, or wide acceptance as they have done-under a mistaken view of human life, and God's moral government.

It is here that the popular theology and the atheistic doctrine of necessity have a common meeting point, and are both equally immoral in their tendency and teaching. The doctrine of necessity--whether openly, and in so many words, or impliedly, and as a necessary corollary to the principles on which it is based, matters nought to the argument-teaches that every act and every motive of man is but the necessary result of circumstances; that the human being acts thus or thus, because he is obliged by the governing fatc which presides over his life to act so, and not otherwise; that, in fact, men are not free agents, and that freewill is a figment of the imagination, and not a fact of nature. The popular theology teaches, in its doctrine of universal hereditary depravity, the impossibility of goodness on the part of the human race; man, the " son of Adam," is tainted with the "original sin of his first "parents," and all his virtues are but as filthy rags," all his strivings after goodness and truth are "vain, and of no account," and if he would be saved he must remain the passive recipient of the mercy of a capricious God. The result of the teaching in both cases is the same-it strikes at the root of human self-respect and self-reliance-man, no longer free to work out his own salvation, is the slave either of an unrelenting fate, or a vengeful Diety.

The doctrines are both equally false. Man is free-to choose the evil, and eschew the good, but if he do so, by an unerring law, in the operation of which the love of God is as conspicuous as in aught else, he suffers therefore. Sin ever brings its merited punishment, and its necessary compensation. Man is free-to do good, and abstain from evil, and in the results he finds an exceeding great reward. Man's virtue is not " filthy rags," in the sight of the Great Father, who looks with approbation upon the good deeds of His child. He has not surrounded man with circumstances which conquer him, but has given to each and all the power to conquer circumstances, and work out their own salvation. Were it not so-where would man's responsibility be? and why should the actions of men be condemned because they are evil, or applauded when good? Nero and Socrates, the evil and the good, would stand on the same footing-the example and the warning in either case would be lost, and history have no teaching for us.

God's moral government, by means of an ever-working law, is quite compatible with man's perfect freedom. God has instituted certain laws which, if obeyed, lead to happiness and wisdom, and conduct man by progressive steps ever onward and upward; but He has left man free to obey or disobey. With disobedience come misery, darkness, and ignorance, as the just punishment of the disobedience; yet not a punishment merely, but a teaching too. Out of the wisdom gained by and through this teaching, come attempts to amend the evil, and by degrees the effects of the former disobedience are removed; and so the ultimate result is the progress to further which the law was designed. Thus God's moral government is vindicated ; and whether in the evils resulting from disobedience, or the reward reaped as the consequence of obedience, God still stands as the Father of humanity, desiring man's happiness and leading him onward to perfection; and out from the depths of past centuries comes the very Voice of God in history, to teach us that by earnest endeavour to find the true and the right path, even in the midst of thick darkness, men have been able to find it, and that when they entered upon it and began to work in the right direction, they have had the law of God to aid them in their work.

65

66

JAS. L. GOODING.

SOUTH PLACE CHAPEL SUNDAY EVENING LECTURES. BY P. W. PERFITT, PH. D.

THE LIFE AND CAREER OF SOLOMON.

(Continued from p. 176.)

THE same kind of doubts are called forth by the accounts which have been furnished of the number of men employed in the work of building. It is set forth that Solomon applied to Hiram, the King of Tyre, for both men and materialscunning men and cedar wood. This king had been friendly to David, and Solomon sagaciously urged the old friendship as a reason in favour of compliance with his request. "As thou didst deal with David my father, and didst send him cedars to 'build him an house to dwell therein, even so deal with me. Behold I build an "house to the name of the Lord my God. Send me, now, therefore, a man cunning to work in gold, in silver, and in brass, and in iron, and in purple, "and crimson, and blue, and that can skill to grave with the cunning men "that are with me in Judah and in Jerusalem, whom David my father did provide."* These were men formerly obtained by David from Hiram; for the Hebrew people were sadly defective in mechanical and artistic skill. Solomon asked also for timber, and men to hew it in the forests of Lebanon. "Send me also cedar trees, fir trees, and algum trees, out of Lebanon: for I know "that thy servants are skilled to cut timber in Lebanon; and, behold, my servants "shall be with thy servants, even to prepare me timber in abundance: for the "house which I am about to build shall be wonderful great." Then follows the offer of payment for the labour, in the form of measures of wheat, barley, oil, and wine, the natural products of Palestine. Hiram consented, for the heathen were good natured people, and sent back a letter to Solomon, saying how the wood should be forwarded. "We will cut wood out of Lebanon, as much as thou shalt "nced, and we will bring it to thee in floats by sea to Joppa, and thou shalt carry it up to Jerusalem." Thus the wood was to be floated down the coast to Joppa. Solomon now numbered the Canaanites who were still in the land, and he appointed 70,000 of them to act as bearers of wood, and 80,000 to be hewers of wood in the mountain, and over all he placed 3,600 overseers. It seems, too, that Solomon raised a levy of 30,000 Israelites to cut wood in Lebanon, but these

66

* 2 Chronicles, ii. 7,

+ Ibid, 8-9.

were sent in courses of 10,000 per month.* They remained one month at Lebanon and two months at home, so that their work was lighter than that of the Canaanite serfs. If we put these all together, we have 163,000 men constantly at work preparing the materials for building this temple, without reckoning the men of Tyre and Sidon who were employed. How they were fed so far away from home it is hard to say, and indeed viewing the whole proceeding by the light of modern hewing at Lebanon," we should say it never was as there stated. Probably, however, most of these were of the number engaged in hewing and shaping the great stones which were to be wrought into this great building, and thus their supplies and labour could be better accounted for.

We are informed that the building of the temple, with the completion of all its embellishments, &c., occupied seven years. It was built of stone, lined with cedar, and overlaid with gold. "And the house when it was in building, was built of "stone made ready before it was brought thither; so that there was neither hammer, nor axe, nor any tool of iron heard in the house while it was in 'building." A fact which has afforded the text for innumerable milk-and-wateror strangely ridiculous, discourses. Many honourable men have seen marvellous meanings in the fact that no hammer rang-that no noise was heard; and, indeed, according to them, the purity and sanctity of the house would have been completely destroyed had any nail been driven home by the hammer. And yet is it not strange that nails, under such circumstances, were used at all? We can understand wood and stone being fully prepared to joint together, but the use of nails is altogether valueless if they are merely to fit into holes already prepared; sceing that, without being forced in--driven home-they cannot impart strength.

This point, however, is not very important-much more important is it to learn in what form the temple was built. And here we come upon a world of contradictions. No two writers are agreed either about its form or the arrangement of its courts, and this great diversity results from the contradictory statements in "Kings" and "Chronicles"; but considerable light has been thrown upon the subject by the recent study of Egyptian temples, so that it now seems quite clear, not only that this so much-vaunted temple was a copy from the Egyptian, but also that it was so small that it cannot be spoken of as in any sense equal to the Egyptian. To satisfy my hearers that this statement is justified by facts, I shall here quote from Dr. Kitto's description: "Like the Egyptian temples, that of Solomon was composed of three principal parts. The porch, or pronaos, the depth of which was equal to half of its length. Next to this was a large apartment, designated the Sanctuary, or Holy Place,-forty cubits long by twenty wide. This was the naos. And lastly, beyond this lay the third or innermost chamber, a square of twenty cubits, called the Holy of Holics, answering to the sekos of Egyptian temples, where was placed the ark with its hovering cherubim, and where also the most sacred objects of their religion were placed by the Egyptians. The arrangements of the external buildings, with the different courts, also coincided with the arrangements of Egyptian temples, as described by Strabo, and as they are still to be seen in the existing remains of ancient temples in that country. The Holy of Holies, or inner sanctuary, was divided from the rest of the temple by a partition of cedar, in the centre of which was a pair of folding-doors of olive wood, very richly carved with palm-trees, and open flowers, and cherubim,the whole overlaid with gold. A like pair of folding doors, of grander dimensions, also overlaid with gold, embossed in rich patterns of cherubim, and knops, and open flowers, formed the outer entrance. Both pairs of doors were furnished with massive pins of gold (not 'hinges' which were not known), turning in holes made in the lintel and the threshold. These were, in Egypt, often of metal, and some of bronze have been found, and exist in cabinets of antiquities. The door forming the entrance to the most Holy Place was left open, and the space covered, as is usual in the East, by a magnificent veil or curtain. It may be asked, how the interior received light, seeing that the storeys of chambers occupied the sides? But these buildings did not reach the top, and in the upper part of the wall, between the flat

* 1 Kings, v. 13.14.

roof of the chambers and the top of the wall of the main building, was a row of narrow windows which lighted up the interior. The floor of the temple was formed of planks of fir, covered with gold. The inside walls and the flat ceiling were lined with cedar beautifully carved, representing cherubim and palm-trees, clusters of foliage and open flowers, among which, as in Egypt, the lotus was conspicuous; and the whole interior was so overlaid with gold, that neither wood nor stone was anywhere to be seen, and nothing met the eye but pure gold, either plain, as in the floor, or richly chased, as on the walls, and, as some think, with precious stones in the representations of flowers, and other enrichments. This style of ornamentation is quite Oriental, and certainly ancient. The examples of it which have come under our notice, show that precious stones may be applied with greater advantage than is usually supposed to internal decoration, and satisfy us that they might, with truly rich and beautiful effect, be employed in this instance in setting off the costly enchasement in gold. That precious stones were employed in the interior decoration appears from 2 Chron. iii. 6, which expressly states that Solomon'garnished the house with precious stones.' And we know that David provided for the work, and his nobles contributed, all manner of precious stones.*** It seems that even the inside of the porch was lined with gold. This front part of the building was also enriched with two pillars of brass, one called Jachin and the other Boaz-which, being cast entire, seem to have been regarded as masterpieces of Hiram's art. They exhibited the usual proportions of Egyptian columns, being five-and-a-half diameters high. Their use has been disputed. Some think that they stood as detached ornaments in front of or in the porch-like the two obelisks which we often see before Egyptian temples, while others suppose that they contributed to support the entablature of the porch. Their height and dimensions are favourable to this opinion, as are the analogics afforded by Egyptian buildings, in which two pillars are seen supporting the entablature of the pronaos, resembling the pillars on which rested the porch of the Philistine temple Samson overthrew."

6

All was after the Egyptian style, and if it be true that Solomon did really build a temple, may it not be that it was rather in accordance with the thoughts of his Egyptian wife? She was ready to aid, and could secure men to instruct her husband. The theory of God having been the Architect is abandoned by all save the ignorant; and there is very little reason for doubting that the model came out of the land of bondage.

It remains for us to notice the peculiar ornaments, the petty size, and the general dimensions of this wonder of the world. Undoubtedly, and entirely independent of the commandment to make to themselves no likeness of things above or below, the walls were ornamented with Lions, Cherubim, and Oxen. Oxen, too, were in great request to support the large tank of brass, reminding us of the bull Apis, so highly venerated in Egypt. What relation had oxen to the Jehovah worship? Then the Cherubim in various forms, either upon the walls or as independent figures these were copies from the Egyptian and the Syrian. The Cherubim, as described by Ezekiel, was a bull, a lion, an eagle, and a man, and he distinctly declares that this was the form of the Cherubim of the temple. Look at the winged figures upon either the Egygtian, Persian, Babylonian, or Assyrian sculptures, and you see at once the Cherubim of Solomon. He had two large ones made with their wings extended so that the wings of both touched, and spread over 20 cubits. They were 17 feet high, and undoubtedly were noble figures. They stood in the Holy of Holies, and it was between these two, over the mercy seat, that, according to the Hebrew theory, God used to make His appearances. And other Cherubim were carved upon the walls, with many natural history ornaments. How was this? Was Solomon, as before hinted, ignorant of the command of Moses not to make graven images or the likeness of anything in heaven or earth? Certainly the commandment was not observed, and the pious Jews relate that it was here that the wise king turned aside. They say that by introducing these into the temple, he paved the way for his after idolatry. But they overlook the

* 1 Chronicles, xxix. 2.8.

+ Kitto. Daily Bible Illustrations, vol. i. p. 59. And this is an orthodox book.