"They dwelt in tents in the wilderness as long ago as Isaiah's and Jeremiah's time-(Isa. xiii. 20; Jer. iii. 2) -and they do the same at this day. This is very extraordinary, that, "his hand should be against every man, and every man's hand against him;" and yet that he should be able to "dwell in the presence of his brethren;" but extraordinary as it was, this also has been accomplished, both in the person of Ishmael and in his posterity. As for Ishinael himself, the sacred historian afterwards relates, chapter xxv. 17, 18, that "the years of the life of Ishmael were a hundred and thirty and seven years; and he died in the presence of all his brethren." As for his posterity, they dwelt likewise in the presence of all their brethren: Abraham's sons by Keturah; the Moabites and Ammonites, descendants of Lot; the Israelites, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and the Edomites, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Esau. They still subsist a distinct people, and inhabit the country of their progenitors; they have from first to last maintained their independence; and notwithstanding the most powerful efforts for their destruction, still dwell in the presence of all their brethren, and in the presence of all their enemies."-Bp. Newton.

"The region inhabited by the Arabs is not remote or insulated, separated from social life; and, therefore, exempt from the influence which naturally results from intercourse with other countries. It is situated in that portion of the globe in which society originated, and the first kingdoms were formed. The greatest empires of the world arose and fell around them. They have not been secluded from correspondence with foreign nations; and thus attached, through ignorance and prejudice, to simple and primitive manners. In the early periods of history they were united as allies to the most powerful monarchs of the East: under their victorious Prophet they once carried their arms over the most distinguished kingdoms of the earth; through many succeeding ages the caravan of the merchant and the companies of Mahometan pilgrims passed regularly over their deserts even their religion has undergone a total change. Yet all these circumstances, which, it might be supposed, would have subdued the most stubborn prejudices and altered the most inveterate habits, have produced no effect upon the Arabs; and they still preserve unimpared a most exact resemblance to the first descendants of Ishmael."-Richards.

CONVERSATION XVIII.

GENESIS XVI, XVII.

AFTER reading over the sixteenth and seventeenth chapters of Genesis, Olympas proceeded as usual-calling upon the seniors for New Testament allusions to the case of Hagar and Sarah, and their sons.

"Tell

Thomas. We find a beautiful allegory made out of this case by Paul to the Galatians iv. 21—31, which we will read with your permission: me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-maid, the other by a free-woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free-woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh, persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond-woman and her son: for the

now.

son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond-woman, but of the free." The two mothers, the two sons, the two births, with the two fortunes of these renowned persons are very interestingly depicted by the Apostle.

Olympas. What is an allegory, Eliza?

Eliza. A continuation of tropes or comparisons -not a single metaphor, but a series of metaphors in illustration of some important subject.

Olympas. A comparison of two subjects under a fixed imagery may, indeed, include all that rhetoricians intend by the use of this animating and impressive figure of speech. State then, Reuben, the points of comparison.

Reuben. The principal points of comparison are four:-1st. The two mothers represent two constitutions or dispensations, usually called the Two Covenants. These are the two covenants-one from mount Sinai; the other from mount Zion, or Jerusalem. 2nd. The tendency of the two institutions is compared to the condition of the two sons-the one a slave, the other a freeman. 3rd. The peculiar character of the birth of these two sons-one in the course of nature: the other out of, or above, the course of nature, "born after the flesh," "born after the Spirit." 4th. The character of the two children indicative of the character of the subjects of the dispensations-"Him that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit." Even so it is now.

Olympas. Any other point, William ?

William. Yes, it appears to me that the fortunes of the two sons, Ishmael and Isaac, are also contrasted.

Olympas. The fortunes of the sons only?

Thomas. The fortunes of the mothers too"Cast out the bond-woman and her son; for the son of the bond-woman shall not inherit with the son of the free-woman.'

Olympas. These are five great points admirably illustrative of the immense difference between a Jew and a Christian-between living "under the law" and "under the gospel;" for that is the main subject illustrated in the allegory. State, Thomas, the facts of the case indicated in the allegory.

Thomas. Some of the Jews in the Galatian churches were desirous of being more or less subject or conformed to the Jewish covenant. Against this amalgamation of law and gospel, of old covenant and new, the Apostle seems to have been remonstrating; and to complete the whole argument closes with the allegorizing of the whole history of the sixteenth chapter of Genesis.

Olympas. But where, Eliza, shall we find this covenant from Agar corresponding to Hagar, the hand-maid of Sarah, and the mother of Ishmael?

Eliza. Is not the covenant of circumcision in the flesh, of which we have just now read in the seventeenth chapter?

Olympas. Not exactly: it is only a dispensation of that covenant. Can you explain, William ?

William. Mount Sinai is defined to be the place whence the covenant personated in Hagar is said to have been issued, as Jerusalem is said to be the place whence the new covenant was promulged, or that indicated by Sarah.

Olympas. True; but observe that as the promise of blessing all nations in Isaac the seed, was

developed and embodied in the form of the gospel covenant of promise; so the promise of giving to Abraham a numerous natural progeny, and the land of Canaan for inheritance, elaborated into the covenant of circumcision, became the basis of that dispensation or covenant from Mount Sinai in Arabia.

Thomas. I desire to understand this subject more fully because of some confusion in my mind occasioned by the baptismal sermon of Parson Godfather, in the Princeton Chapel, at the late christening of Elder Miller's household. Dr. Godfather is said to be a very learned man, and he affirmed that the Christian covenant, called the New Testament, was only a full dispensation; or, as I understood him, a development of the covenant of grace, as he called it, found in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis.

Olympas. The covenant of grace in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis! There is neither a covenant of grace nor a covenant of works named in the seventeenth chapter of Genesis. Change the names, and you will soon make Judas Iscariot out of Jude the brother of James. What, my dear Susan, does Stephen call the transaction found in Genesis seventeenth?

Susan. "The Covenant of Circumcision," sir.

Olympas. You are right, daughter. The Lord himself authorized it by a single expression in Genesis seventeenth. What think you is it, William?

William. After specifying the two comprehensive items of the covenant-1st. " I will be a God to thee and thy seed after thee"-2nd. "I will give to thee and to thy seed after thee the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession"