spirit, I presume. It is evident, then, that man has a spirit that at death goeth not downward as the spirit of the beast. But we must ask the

junior class some more questions. Henry, when God made man, what did he give him?

Henry. Dominion.

Olympas. Dominion over what?

Henry. Over all cattle, fowl, and fish-over the earth and every thing upon

it.

Olympas. And where did he put him?

Henry. In a garden he planted for him eastward in Eden.

Olympas. What kind of fruits and trees grew in this garden, Susan?

Susan. "Every tree that was pleasant to the sight and good for food."

Olympas. The senses were all consulted in this garden. The word Eden and the word Paradise, both mean delight, pleasure. It was eastward in reference to the land of Canaan, or to the place where Moses wrote the law. But let me ask, What were the most celebrated trees in this garden?

James. The Tree of Life, and the Tree of Death.

Olympas. I have sometimes called one of these the Tree of Death in contrast with the other; but I enquire for the name which God gave it?

James. "The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil."

Olympas Where did these trees stand?

Henry. The Tree of Life grew in the midst of the garden; but I do not know where the Tree of Knowledge grew.

Olympas. It would seem as though it were not

far from the Tree of Life. It is, however, of little consequence as to its position in the garden. What was Adam to do in this garden?

Susan. He was to dress it and keep it in order. Olympas. But we have gone too fast. I must return and ask the second class some questions. Have we not, William, a sort of double narrative of the creation of all things?

William. We have a history of what God done, and a history of what the Lord God done.

Olympas. I do not understand you, William. Explain yourself.

William. The history of what God done ends with the third verse of the second chapter. And the history of what the Lord God done begins with the fourth verse of the second, and ends with man's expulsion from Eden and the third chapter of Genesis.

Olympas. Why do you make this difference between God and the Lord God?

William. On counting the first section, I find the word God by itself thirty-four times, and the Lord God never: the Spirit of God once. But in the second section, which ends with the third chapter, I find Lord God twenty times, and God

not once.

Olympas. Have you all made the same observation?

Mary. I find the word God by itself three times in the third chapter.

Edward. But Moses never uses it. The serpent uses it three times. He never says Lord God, but only God. William and I have made the count twice, and find it just as he says. The first account ascribes it all to God, whom Moses

names thirty-four times, and his spirit once; while in the second he ascribes all to the Lord God, and names him twenty times. Olympas. Have you extended your beyond the third chapter on this point?

observations

Edward. The fourth chapter contains a different narrative; and Moses used the name of the Lord alone nine times. Thus the first section of the history ascribes every thing to God-the second every thing to the Lord God, while the third acknowledges only the Lord. Afterwards these titles appear to he used indiscriminately.*

Olympas. Names always represent persons, actions, things, or relations. Different names applied to God represent the various relations in which he stands to himself, and to the universe of which he is the author. But, Eliza, will you tell us all you know about the origin of woman?

Lord and God are both Saxon words. The former denotes a dispenser of bread; the latter denotes good. Elohim is the original for God, and Jehovah for Lord, which for the first time, is found in the fourth verse of the second chapter.

Our English word Lord, while it uniformly represents the Hebrew Jehovah, does not give the particular meaning of it, but simply denotes the being who is Jehovah. The reason of the difference in the style of these three sections seems to be that in the first God appears as Creator simply; in the second, as provider, dispenser, and governor as well as God; and is therefore always called the Lord God. In the third section he appears more in the character of Lord, and generally throughout the book of Genesis. But after these titles are thus clearly introduced and defined in the first three sections, they are frequently used without any apparent regard to their particular meaning. We have, indeed, a very clear representation of God, the Lord, and the Spirit of God, as co-operating in the great work of creation.

Eliza. Woman's creation is found not in the first, but in the second section of the history; after Eden was planted and all things arranged for her comfort, the Lord God caused a deep or death-like sleep to fall on Adam. Meanwhile he extracted a rib from his side, healed up the wound and out of that rib made a woman, a help meet, or companion for Adam. Adam on re

covering his senses, and on receiving this present from the Lord God, exclaimed, "Bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh; thou shalt be called woman, and for thee henceforth shall a man forsake father and mother, sister aud brother, and to thee shall he adhere as his own flesh."

Olympas. And what now was to be the future destiny of this happy pair?

Eliza. They were to live in that delightful garden and partake of all its pleasures-to eat of the Tree of Life, and be for ever young, beautiful, and happy, while they obeyed one single precept. Olympas. What, Reuben, do you call that precept-a positive or a moral precept?

Reuben. A positive precept-a guarantee of liberty and life, requiring only abstinence from

one tree.

Olympas. Why was it positive and not moral, think you?

Reuben. Positive precepts are explicit demands from a sovereign in demonstration of his own rights, and of the attachment and allegiance of his subjects. Moral precepts have respect to our fellows, and regulate our duties to them.

Olympas. To test obedience, and to secure privileges, positive precepts are, then, more wise and safe than moral precepts; inasmuch as they

D

simply assert the rights of the sovereign-furnish one argument only-appeal to but one motiveand make the tenure or condition of enjoyment to depend upon a single, clear, unequivocal action of the subject: and in this case the charter of privileges was so rich and extensive, the restriction so small, the temptation so trivial, that more could not be given nor less required on any principle at all adapted to prove the loyalty and devotion of man to his Creator and Father. What, then, was the result, Mary?

Mary. They were subdued by the serpent, and disobeyed God.

Olympas. To what passion, feeling, or desire in them did this serpent address himself?

Mary. To their desire of knowledge. "You shall be as gods, knowing both good and evil! " Olympas. And what, Mary, have you learned of the author of this temptation?

Mary. The serpent was the most ingenious and companionable of all the creatures that ministered to man. The adversary, who was "a liar and a murderer from the begining," entered into this animal, as he entered into Judas and into many other persons and animals, and made it the instrument of his machinations, and thus deceived our Mother, who, believing a lie rather than the truth of God, obeyed her enemy, aud involved her husband with her in the catastrophe.

Olympas. Whence did you learn this?

Mary. Moses describes the Serpent as the most intellectual or subtle of all brutal creations; and had it not been accustomed to speak to man in some way before the hour of temptation, Eve would have been startled and would not have