moral use of suffering was unknown to them; and this proved that they were themselves not yet purged and free from guilt. If they had been duly sensible of the fallen nature of man, if they had understood themselves, they would have been led, on seeing the misery of Job, not to fall thus furiously upon him, but rather to smite upon their own breasts, and cry, 'God be merciful to me a sinner.' They are right in the general perception of the connection there is between misery and sin; but they fail and stumble in the application of this central truth. In fact, the essential errors of both parties resolve themselves into the same source-the want of a sound insight into the nature of sin. Job conceives himself righteous, and not deserving such afflictions as had fallen upon him, because he had not committed any heinous crimes; and his friends can only account for his great misery by assuming that he was greatly criminal.

Elihu was, therefore, justified in his censure of both parties. The leading principle of Elihu's own statement is—that calamity, in the shape of trial, is inflicted on the best of men ; but that God allows a favourable turn to take place as soon as its object has been realized. This view we have so often enforced in our progress through the book, that we shall not now further develop it. It affords,' as Hengstenberg1 remarks, 'the key to the events of Job's life.' Though a pious and righteous man, he is tried by severe afflictions. He knows not for what purpose he is smitten, and his calamity continues. But when he learns that purpose from the addresses of Elihu and of God, and humbles himself, he is relieved from the burden which oppresses him, and ample prosperity compensates for the afflictions he has sustained. Add to this, that the remaining portion of Elihu's speech, in which he points to God's infinite majesty as including his justice, is substantially

We have, with some modification, followed here the view which Hengstenberg has given of the argument; and we have done so with the more satisfaction, from having been obliged, in the preceding pages, to dissent from some of his conclusions, and to produce views different from those which this great writer has taken.

contained in the addresses of God; that Elihu foretell's God's appearance; that he is not rebuked by God, as are the friends of Job; and, in fine, that Job by his very silence acknowledges the problem to have been solved by Elihu; and his silence is the more significant because Elihu had urged him to defend himself (xxxiii. 32), and because Job had repeatedly declared, that he would hold his peace if it were shown him 'wherein he had erred' (vi. 24).

The following excellent analysis of Elihu's address has been given by a recent acute writer: "He shows that they had accused Job upon false or insufficient grounds, and failed to convict him, or to vindicate God's justice. Job again had assumed his entire innocence, and had arraigned that justice. These errors he traces to their both overlooking one main object of all suffering. God speaks to man by chastisement-warns him, teaches him selfknowledge and humility, and prepares him by the mediation of a spiritual interpreter (the angel Jehovah of Genesis) to implore and obtain pardon, renewal of life, perfect access, and restoration. This statement does not involve any charge of special guilt, such as the friends had alleged and Job had repudiated. Since the warning and suffering are preventive as well as remedial, the visitation anticipates the commission of sin; it saves man from pride, and other temptations of wealth and power, and it effects the real object of all divine interpositions, the entire submission to God's will. Again, Elihu argues that any charge of injustice, direct or implicit, against God, involves a contradiction in terms. God is the only source of justice; the very idea of justice is derived from his governance of the universe, the principle of which is love. In his absolute knowledge God sees all secrets, in his absolute power He controls all events, and that for the one end of bringing righteousness to light. Man has, of course, no claim upon God; what he receives is purely a matter of grace. The occasional appearance of unanswered prayer, when evil seems to get the upper hand, is owing merely to the fact that man prays in a proud and insolent spirit. Elihu proceeds to show that the almightiness of God is not, as Job seems to assert, associated with any contempt or neglect of his creatures. Job, by ignoring this truth, had been led into grave error and terrible danger; but God is still drawing him, and if he yields and follows, he will yet be delivered.'1

1 Rev. F. C. Cook, in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, s. v. JOB.

Seventh Week-Fifth Day.

THE LORD SPEAKS.-JOB XXXVIII.

THERE are interesting circumstances towards the close of Elihu's address, which the reader must not overlook.

Every one has admired the description of a thunder-storm which he gives at the commencement of the thirty-seventh chapter. Many descriptions of such storms have been given, but this excels them all, and is itself surpassed only by that of another sacred writer in the eighteenth Psalm. But it does not perhaps occur to many readers that it is a storm then actually raging that Elihu describes, although the expressions of personal emotion which are interspersed might suffice to indicate the fact that Elihu, while he speaks, is witnessing the progress of the awful storm, ending in 'the whirlwind,' out of which the voice of the Lord is heard. After this description, Elihu begins to touch on other manifestations of God's presence and power in the phenomena of the natural world, the storm still continuing, and increasing in a degree so peculiar and awful, that he begins to see in it the signs of the Lord's immediate approach; and although he still speaks, he is agitated, and his language becomes abrupt and confused, such as one would use whose mind is filled and overawed by the approach of God. It is solemn and full of reverence, but not connected, and is much less calm than his ordinary discourse, until at last, overwhelmed by the awful symbols of the divine presence, he subsides abruptly into silence; and then, after a solemn pause, the voice of the Lord himself is heard from the whirlwind.

The speech itself is no less sublime than the circumstances by which it is introduced. 'It is,' says Dr. Young, who has given a vigorous paraphrase of this portion of the book, 'by much the finest part of this, the noblest and most ancient poem in the world.' Bishop Patrick declares that its grandeur is as much above all other poetry, as thunder is louder than a

whisper. I imagine,' says Scott, it will be easily granted, that, for majesty of sentiment and strength of expression, this speech has nothing equal to it in the most admired productions of Greece and Rome.' A recent writer1 well remarks that, 'To put suitable language in the mouth of the Deity, has generally tasked to straining or crushed to feebleness the genius of poets. Homer, indeed, at times nobly ventriloquizes from the top of Olympus; but it is ventriloquism: Homer's thunder, not Jove's. Milton, while impersonating God, falls flat; he peeps and mutters from the dust; he shrinks from seeking to fill up the compass of the Eternal's voice. Adequately to represent God speaking, required not only the highest inspiration, but that the poet had heard, or thought that he heard, his very voice, shaping articulate sounds from midnight torrents, from the voices of the wind, from the chambers of thunder, from the rush of the whirlwind, from the hush of night, and from the breeze of day. And, doubtless, the author of the Book of Job had this experience. . . . . . Some poems have voices to the note of the flute, and others to the swell of the organ; but this highest reach of poetry rose to the music of the mightiest and oldest elements of nature, combining to form the various parts in the one voice of God. And how this whirlwind of poetry, once aroused, storms along-how it ruffles the foundations of the earth-how it churns up the ocean into spray-how it unveils the old treasures of the hail and the snow-how it soars up to the stars-how the lightnings say to it, "Here we are"-how, stooping from this pitch, it sweeps over the various noble or terrible creatures of the bard's country, raising the mane of the lion, stirring the wild horror of the raven's wing, racing with the wild ass into the wilderness, flying with the eagle and the hawk, shortening speed with the lazy vastness of behemoth, awakening the thunder of the horse's neck, and daring to open "the doors of the fire," with the teeth "terrible round about” of leviathan himself! The truth, the literal exactness, the freshness, fire, and rapidity of the figures ' REV. G. GILFILLAN in his Bards of the Bible. Edinburgh, 1851. This author is of those who take the Book of Job to be an allegory.

presented, resemble less the slow, elaborate work of a painter, than a succession of pictures taken instantaneously by the finger of the sun, and true to the smallest articulation of the burning life.'

It is remarkable also of this great speech, that it is entirely composed of a series of interrogatory sentences or clauses. Here, more than in any other portion of Scripture, do we perceive the use, value, and effective application of this form of address, in exalting our ideas of the Deity; while every question awes into silence, and inspires with the humblest views of our own insufficiency and weakness. The writer last cited describes, in his own sparkling manner, the speech as ‘a series of questions following each other like claps of thunder.'

Although many writers, ancient and modern, have used this form of address with ability and effect—and its use in oratory is well known-there are no instances on record which so strongly manifest how the sense may be strengthened, adorned, and exalted, as those furnished in the prophetical and poetical books of Scripture. Numberless instances might be produced; and amid the large variety, the choice is perplexed in any attempt at selection. One or two may, however, be indicated. Deborah's words, in the person of Sisera's mother, supply a noble instance of this use of interrogations: The mother of Sisera looked out at a window, and cried through the lattice, Why is his chariot so long in coming? why tarry the wheels of his chariots? Her wise ladies answered her; yea, she returned answer to herself, Have they not sped? have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? to Sisera a prey of divers colours, a prey of divers colours of needle-work, of divers colours of needle-work on both sides, meet for the necks of them that take the spoil?" Mark also the skilful use of this form of speech in Paul's transfer of his address from Festus to Agrippa. First he speaks of him in the third person. The king,' he says, ‘knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely.' Then, turning short upon him, he asks: 'King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets?' and immediately answers 1 Judges v. 28-30.