upon its surface, would be destroyed, and the earth itself, with its satellite, the moon, thrown out of its orbit. For we are assured that the almighty hand of God-which not only first created the stars, and so arranged them that they would move with unvaried regularity in their orbits, but which continues to move, and preserve, and govern all things in heaven and earth-would not be too weak to ward off any such disastrous consequences. In a word, if this were the correct interpretation of the passage, there is to our mind no objection, founded upon the supposed impossibility or inutility, which would have the least weight with us, or excite a doubt as to the actual occurrence of so remarkable a miracle.

But, first of all, we must remember that we have in these verses, not the words of the historian himself, but a quotation from the book of Jasher,' or 'book of the just;' and that in the only other place in which that book is mentioned, an ode is copied from it, viz., the elegy which David wrote on the occasion of Jonathan's death. Moreover, there can be no doubt as to the poetical form of the extract made from that book in the passage before us. This, at least, is admitted by every commentator. The book of Jasher was, in all probability, a collection of odes, written in honour of the heroes of the theocracy, to which fresh contributions were frequently made; for Jasher, in the opinion of most modern writers, means the true theocrats.

If, then, the book of Jasher was a collection of odes, we must interpret the passage before us according to the analogy of other songs and works of a similar kind, that is, as a poetical work of imagination, and not as a history in prose. But it may be said in reply, We are only justified in resorting to a poetical explanation if it can be proved indisputably that the poet did not confine himself to the plain historical truth, but merely intended to express in forcible language, and clothe in purely imaginative drapery the fact that Joshua expressed a desire that the day might not end till the enemy was completely defeated.' We must certainly make the general acknowledgment here, that a poet may communicate historical truth. In fact, the fifteenth verse, with which this extract concludes, contains a historical statement, and that in pure prose. So also does the song of Moses in Exodus xv. end with a historical remark; but no one would think of inferring from that that every poetical expression, and all the imagery of the song, must be understood literally. Why, then, should we in this case if not in that? We proceed, however, to the examination of the song.

In verse 12, the word 'spake' is sometimes supposed to mean 'sang,' because a song follows. I do not adopt that explanation, however, for Joshua would certainly not sing the words, but speak them. All that we learn from the first clause is, that 'Joshua spake to the Lord;' that is, that he addressed the sun in the terms which follow; for his address to the sun was the utterance of a desire to the Lord and Creator of the sun. That he did this in the sight, or presence of

* 2 Samuel i. 18.

Israel, does not prove, as some suppose, that a miracle actually occurred. The most that they show is, that the words themselves were really spoken by Joshua, and not put into his mouth by the poet. The expression used by Joshua is, 'Sun, wait (not stand still) at Gibeon, and Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.' But if the Hebrew word means wait, which it does, the sentence is elliptical, and to complete it we must add, from the next verse, the words, 'until the people have avenged themselves of their enemies.' Another question arises here; viz., when and where did Joshua utter these words? Some imagine it to have been in the evening, just as the sun was setting, and after the moon had risen. There was no necessity, they say, for Joshua to feel any anxiety before then, lest he should not have time enough to destroy the enemy; moreover, the sun and moon would not be visible together till the evening. Others infer from the words, in the midst of heaven the sun stood still,' that it was at Gibeon in the middle of the day. There,' says one writer, in the heat of the battle Joshua felt the desire that the sun should stand still; by the time that the moon shone he hoped to reach Ajalon in his pursuit of the foe. And from that place the moon is not to withdraw her light till he no longer stands in need of it.' But this supposes that when he spoke the moon was not shining at all. For the valley of Ajalon was on the west of Gibeon, and if the sun at mid-day was seen above the latter place, the moon could not at the same time have been visible in the west or south-west above the former. And such a supposition is unnatural. Since Joshua addresses both, we must conclude that both were visible; for his real wish must have been that the sun should not set, in other words, that the day should not end, till he had subdued his enemies; and therefore the only thing likely to induce him to address the moon as well was that he saw it in the sky. The setting of the moon could not affect his purpose, and this accounts, probably, for the fact that the poet afterwards only refers to the sun, and speaks of it as delaying to go down. If, then, Joshua saw both at the same time, as Gibeon is on the east of Ajalon, it must have been in the early part of the day and during the engagement before Gibeon itself; for then the sun might have been visible on the east or south-east of Gibeon, and the moon in the south-west, above the valley of Ajalon, as it might then have been about to set.

What, then, is the meaning of the words, Sun, wait at Gibeon, and Moon, in the valley of Ajalon, till the people avenge themselves on their enemies?' Joshua can hardly have intended to express the desire that God would work a miracle, and make the sun and moon stand still. At the most he can only have been anxious for them not to set till Israel had entirely subdued their enemies. And, therefore, when the poet afterwards announces the fulfilment of his desire in the words, and the sun waited, and the moon stood still, till the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies,' he is merely saying that God heard Joshua's prayer, and gave the Israelites a complete victory over their enemies before the setting of the sun and moon; and does not intend to affirm that the sun and moon miraculously stood still.

There are some, however, who suppose that this is clearly expressed in the last two clauses of the 13th verse, and the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.' But these very words, in which the poet is describing, in his own language, the fulfilment of Joshua's desires, lead to the opposite conclusion. The expression, stood still,' is explained by the parallel clause, it hasted not to go down; and if any one is inclined to take this literally, it means, not a complete cessation of motion, but a slower movement.

Different explanations have been given of the phrase, about a whole day.' One writer substitutes the rendering, the greatest and longest day,' and explains it as meaning that to those in Gibeon it was like a very long day in summer.' Another supposes it to be elliptical, and would complete the sentence thus, as is the case in a perfect and entire day. But neither of these is admissible. The literal meaning of the words is, 'the sun did not hasten to go down (delayed its setting) for nearly a whole day;' i. e. it remained in the sky nearly a whole day longer. There is nothing, however, in the context to render a literal interpretation necessary. It is true, that in the 14th verse the poet says, and there was no day like that before it or after it.'

But there is no evidence that he means by this that the day really lasted longer than any other. For the thing which distinguished that day above all others was, that the Lord hearkened unto the voice of a man;' i.e. that, in compliance with Joshua's wish, he did not allow the day to end till he had overthrown his enemies, for the Lord fought for Israel.'

If we had before us only prose, or the words of the historian himself, we should, without any hesitation, admit that the day was miraculously lengthened in consequence of a retardation of the sun's course. But the 13th and 14th verses are merely a poetical expansion of the words which Joshua uttered in the heat of the conflict, Sun, wait . . . . till the people have avenged themselves upon their enemies;' and we should therefore entirely overlook the very essence of poetry if we were to adhere so closely to the words of the poet, as to understand them as meaning that the day was miraculously prolonged in consequence of the sun standing still. In fact, it would show an utter want of ability to enter into the spirit of poetry, or of any figurative writing, for us to regard the words of Joshua, Sun, wait at Gibeon, and Moon, in the valley of Ajalon,' as either a command addressed to the sun and moon, or a prayer that God would cause them to stand still. When Isaiah prays to the Lord, in the name of his people, O that thou wouldest rend the heavens and come down, that the mountains might flow down at thy presence;" or when David sings, In my distress I called upon the Lord . . . . . he heard my voice out of his temple. . . . he bowed the heavens also and came down.... he sent from above and took me; he drew me out of many waters;t who is there who ever thinks of taking their words literally, as

Is. lxiii. 19.

† Ps. xviii. 7-17.

meaning an actual rending of the heavens, or a desire that God would actually descend from heaven and stretch out his hand to draw David out of the water? Undoubtedly, the idea of a fearful storm accompanied by earthquake has furnished materials for the imagery of the 18th Psalm; but it is as clear as day that the striking figures which it contains are not fully explained by referring them to an earthquake and storm. And the same may be said of Deborah's song, They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.'* There have, indeed, been some who have endeavoured to explain her words historically, on the supposition that the stars actually contended against Sisera, by concealing themselves, and, as it were, withdrawing their light. That is to say, when night came on the heavens were overcast, and the fugitive was deprived of the benefit of starlight.' But to change the fighting of the stars into a withdrawal of their light is so unnatural a perversion of the words, that instead of furnishing an argument against the figurative interpretation of the passage in Joshua, they decidedly support it. The most important passage is in Habakkuk,† where the prophet writes, according to the usual rendering, 'the sun and moon stood still in their habitation;' i. e. in the sky. Most commentators regard this as a direct confirmation of the fact that the sun miraculously stood still at Gibeon. But with our present knowledge of Hebrew, no one at all acquainted with the language would need to be told that such a translation is grammatically incorrect. The literal meaning of the words is, sun and moon have entered into their habitation;' and hence they do not bear any reference even to the setting of the sun and moon, but denote an obscuration resembling their setting. The early miracle and the words of Habakkuk are in direct antithesis to each other.' Instead, therefore, of proving that the passage in Joshua contains the description of a miracle, the words of the prophet furnish evidence in support of the opposite conclusion. For, if by the entrance of the sun and moon into their habitation, we are not to understand a literal withdrawal, but are to take it merely as a poetical representation of total darkness, there is the same reason for not interpreting the passage literally, when it is said that the sun and moon stood still in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down.' It has, indeed, been said that, if we have only a poetical quotation, the writer, who introduces it in the midst of a historical narrative, ought to have added a description in prose of the circumstances which the poet intended to celebrate; and that, whereas this is done in every other instance, it is the more requisite in this case, since the quotation is introduced without any explanation at all, and therefore the reader could not come to any other conclusion than that it contains a historical statement, and for that reason there was no necessity for

* Judg. v. 20.

† Hab. iii. 2.

We do not meet with a single reference to these verses of the book of Joshua in any passage in the Old or New Testament; whereas, if they really describe the occurrence of so extraordinary a miracle, the only one of its kind, we certainly should have expected to find it mentioned again.

further explanation. To this we reply, that all the explanation required is given clearly enough in the context. The whole passage,* as we have already shown, is parenthetical, and is taken from a poetic description of the victory gained by Joshua at Gibson. It is, therefore, evident that, if this is its character, it cannot contain any fresh historical details. Moreover, we must observe that in vers. 10 and 11, the author has fully described the course of the victory over the enemy, first at Gibeon, and then in the flight to Azekah and Makkedah; and, besides relating the fact of their defeat, has given an account of the death of a greater number from the large hailstones, which were sent down from the heavens by God, than from the swords of the Israelites. And as soon as he has finished this quotation, he resumes the thread of the history, which was dropped at ver. 11, and shows how the fugitive kings were taken and slain. Now, if we look carefully at all this, and mark the close connexion between the 11th and 16th verses, it will certainly be apparent enough that the intervening section, which contains the extracts from the book of odes, does not relate any fresh occurrence, or anything which has not already been told in other words, but is merely a poetical picture of the historical events narrated in the 10th and 11th verses. The only difference is in the form in which those events are described, for in reality it is the same thing whether the omnipotence of God extends one day to the length of two, or causes as much to be accomplished in one day, as, without his help, would inevitably require two.

The Battle of Church-rates.

J. Al.

ALTHOUGH the re-introduction of the Church-rate Abolition Bill, by a majority of two to one, is not a triumph, the circumstances attending the event decisively indicate that the day of triumph is approaching. The change in the Government has afforded really liberal officals an opportunity for avoiding, with a good grace, the fatuitous blundering of last session in respect to ecclesiastical matters. It is true that Lord Palmerston is professedly unpledged to support, or even to refrain from opposing, the second reading, but, in assenting to the introduction of a bill unconditionally abolishing church-rates, the Government, and with it the whole Liberal party, has, virtually, committed itself to the principle involved, and will find it difficult to vote against the measure at its next stage. The Tories were logically right in their resistance, but in respect to policy showed wretched generalship, in allowing the abolition party to acquire the moral influence given to them by the late division.

Will the Ayes' have it on the second reading on the 16th inst.?

Verses 12-15.