special care to inform the reader where he obtained it, and where it might be found? We think, as we have already intimated, that it is the latter. But if the former-if the passage be truly a part of those writings which compose the book of Joshua, and which record the wonderful success that attended the arms of Israel, when God wrought with them to empty the land of their enemies, and to establish them in it, then do we most cheerfully receive it as the word of God, and verily believe that "the sun and moon stood still at the command of Joshua, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

Before we present the argument, however, in favor of our position, we shall take the liberty to introduce some

Preliminary Remarks.

The passage under consideration has evidently been regarded with very great interest, both by the friends and the enemies of revelation. The frequency with which this passage has been brought forward to disprove the authenticity of the whole Bible, has led the friends of revelation, perhaps, to be more determined in their defence of it than they otherwise would have been. They have seemed to act under the impression, that to give it up was virtually to surrender the truth of the Scriptures. There can be no doubt, we think, that 1 John 5: 7, and part of 8, has been defended in this way, until, by the great majority of those who receive the Bible as the word of God, it has come to be regarded as genuine. And yet, the proofs against that passage amount almost to a demonstration. The same may be said of Ecclesiastes 12: 8-14, and of some others. The object in endeavoring to retain these passages cannot have been exclusively, or even principally, the doctrines which they are thought to contain; for, so far as these passages seem capable of being understood, they declare no other doctrines than those which are abundantly sustained by other passages of Scripture, whose genuineness has never been attacked by any who would not attack the whole Bible.

The doctrine of the Trinity is undeniably in the word of God, whatever becomes of 1 John 5: 7, 8; and that of a future state of retribution can be found there, without a reference to the dubious verses in Ecclesiastes; especially verses 11 and 12, which seem wholly without meaning. It is evident that the cause of truth needs no false supports. We ought, perhaps, to say with Dr. Chalmers, it can have none; for, if we introduce into the foundation of a superstructure any material which is not substantial, any thing which contains in itself the elements of decay, we virtually endanger the whole fabric; because when that which was true and of permanent value comes to receive the additional weight, which for a time rests securely on the false, but which, by reason of the decay, has been thrown upon the good, it is crushed beneath it, as if it were itself spurious like the other, and the fabric perishes. We render, therefore, very dubious service to revelation, when we persist in defending and retaining that which we ought at once to give up. We do not intend to be understood as saying, or even admitting, that we are to surrender a passage merely because unbelief or temerity has attacked it; but only that we are not to depend on those passages which, to say the least, are somewhat doubtful; since we may thus be understood as risking the defence of our whole cause upon them.

These remarks apply with great force to the passage under consideration. We need it not in support of the doctrine of a particular, overruling, and special Providence. We can show without difficulty, that he sustained the prophets and apostles, by giving them power to perform those works which no other men could; and which were, perhaps, the best credentials that the nature of the case admitted in favor of the truth of their message. There is enough of clear and indisputable Scripture in support of this, without the so-called miracle of arresting the sun and moon.

But it is distinctly admitted, that this consideration should not influence us to reject the passage in Joshua. It may be true. The thing which it asserts is not more difficult for a

wonder-working God than any of the well attested miracles that he wrought. The plagues of Egypt, the passage of the Red Sea, the giving of the Law, the supplying of his people with bread from heaven, or any of the miracles recorded in the New Testament, are as marked exhibitions of Divine power, as the stopping of the sun and moon. And even if it were not so; if the miracle we are considering were one that evidently demanded a much greater effort, in our estimation, on the part of God, we ought not to be influenced by this consideration, in making up our mind as to whether we should believe or not. How can we determine the comparative degree of power which the Almighty must put forth in any given case? How can men say which is the greater or the less work for Him to perform, "who giveth no account of any of his matters," and who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will"? No matter how great the miracle, no matter how stupendous the work, if indeed it is what God has wrought, and he has caused a record to be made of it, we are to receive it. But the question before us is, Did he perform it? Did he, in answer to the request of Joshua, cause the sun and moon to stand still, that his people might avenge themselves of their enemies? This is the whole question which concerns us. It will not be regarded, we believe, as irrelevant or improper for us, in this place, to remark, that no one who has attempted to explain this passage, or who has adventured a theory in regard to it, seems satisfied with his own work when executed. He turns away with evident discomfort, as if to say, "There, I have given the best account of it in my power, and I hope you will be satisfied with it." Even the enemies of revelation, as they have attacked it, with a view to destroy the argument from miracles, seem not to regard themselves as having done any thing toward the accomplishment of their object, in destroying the credibility of the Scriptures, when they have swept the pas

sage away.

It may also be well enough, in passing, to advert to the circumstance which first directed our attention to the question

of the genuineness or inspiration of this text, viz., the astounding fact that a miracle of this magnitude was never once referred to in the writings of prophets, apostles, or evangelists, or even in the instructions of Jesus Christ. By no one who preached or prophesied, at a period subsequent to the conquest of Canaan, though he may have mentioned, and repeatedly too, mos of the mighty works which were done for Israel, is the stopping of the sun and moon alluded to, even once! We shall undoubtedly here be told, that the prophet Habakkuk has referred to it. But they who undertake to maintain this will find it quite as difficult a task as to defend the passage in dispute; all which will be made to appear in its proper place.

We shall now give a few of the principal theories invented to explain the passage:

1. There are those who understand it literally; who supFose that, in obedience to the command of Joshua, the sun and moon stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about the space of a whole day. We speak, of course, the language of every day and of every age, in reference to this matter, without regard to the philosophy of the thing, or the more rigid principles of astronomy; this is the language used in the text.

They who embrace the literal view, suppose, of course, that the diurnal motion of the earth was arrested for the space of about twelve hours, that the waters of the sea were prevented from rushing out upon the land, by the same Almighty hand which had made all things, and which had been thus stretched out to work this important miracle; that all things found upon the surface of the earth, which otherwise would have been piled into a mountain of ruins, by the sudden cessation of the earth's motion, were prevented from doing so by the same hand in short, that every thing took place as here recorded, without figure, metaphor, or poetry, just as it would appear to an intelligent inhabitant of the earth, with all the necessary means before him for measuring time, and with the sun and moon passing through the heavens. And this is the

view to be taken, if it be determined that the passage before us is an inspired portion of the word of God. The difficulties we may feel are no greater than those felt in connexion with any well-authenticated miracle recorded in the Scriptures. And we know not that we feel any difficulties whatever in respect to those which are well attested. We suppose that He who has established the laws of nature, has power to alter those laws whenever it shall seem good in his sight; and that he can arrest or reverse them when he pleases.

The literal interpretation of this passage is found as far back as the days of Jesus Siracides, the author of the book of Ecclesiasticus, about 150 or 160 B. C., and is referred to in Chap. 46, in the following words: "Was not one day as long as two?" And so late a writer as Budè Guilloumè, (or Buddeus,) born at Paris, 1467, founds an argument against the Copernican philosophy on the literal interpretation of it. Gallileo and Columbus met with it in the mouth of the bigoted monk and ignorant priest, who were opposed to their philosophy. In a word, it has been the general view taken of it by those who have received the Scriptures as a revelation from God, from the earliest ages of history. This circumstance may have some bearing on determining the true character of the passage.

2. Another opinion is, that the Almighty so far arrested or altered the ordinary course of things, as to cause an extraordinary refraction of the solar and lunar rays, without stopping the sun, moon, or earth, in its course; but only causing things to appear to the inhabitants of the earth just as they would, were the sun and moon to be made to pause in their journey through the heavens. This is the ground taken by Mr. Taylor in his edition of Calmet's Dictionary. It supposes that the event transpired at mid-summer, when the sun was in his highest northern position; that it was near the full moon, just at the setting of the sun, and of course as the moon was rising. At Gibeon, then, (latitude 35 deg. 30 min.) the longest day is fifteen hours. If, now, we add one hour and a half of twilight, morning and evening, we shall have