016. CHAPTER 6 - THE CREATION.

CHAPTER 6 - THE CREATION.

1. WE examine the nature of creation. The original word rendered created, in the first of Genesis, is bara, which, according to Kimchi, Buxtorf, and learned critics generally, means to bring forth into being what previously had no existence-an egression from nonentity to entity. From the prime meaning of the word itself, as well as from the process, as presented in the Mosaic record, we learn that God, “in the beginning,” or at the commencement of time, made or created the matter of which the heavens and the earth were formed.

Many of the ancient heathens, ignorant of revelation, and guided only by the wild speculations of their own imagination, had such inadequate conceptions of the character of Deity, that they could not conceive it possible for him to create the material universe out of nothing. Hence they supposed that matter, in a chaotic state, existed from all eternity, and that the Deity only arranged and combined the discordant materials, so as to bring order out of confusion, and cause the universe to appear in its harmony and beauty. As we have already seen, this fabulous account of creation is contrary to the Mosaic history. St. Paul, in Hebrews 11:3, appears to aim a blow directly at this error of the pagan philosophers, when he tells us: “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” The “things which do appear” are material; but, according to the text just quoted, the worlds were not made of preexistent matter. Indeed, the first work of creation, according to the Bible, appears to have been to call forth into being the materials of which the worlds were afterward framed. Thus we perceive that God, in the highest sense of the word, created all things out of nothing.

It might easily be shown that the Mosaic account of the origin of the world is the only consistent theory of the material universe ever presented. The views upon this subject of those who have rejected revelation, may all be embraced in two general divisions. First, the system already noticed, which admits the eternity of matter, but allows that the power of God was exerted in forming out of the original materials furnished to his hand, and which were coexistent with him, the worlds as we see them displayed around us. The second theory is that which teaches the eternity of the material universe, in its properly organized condition.

Both these theories are not only not countenanced by revelation, but are in direct contradiction to its plain declarations. That they are also absurd in themselves, and encumbered by insuperable difficulties, in the view of reason, a little reflection will clearly evince.

First, to suppose that matter existed from eternity, is to ascribe to it self-existence. That which existed from eternity could not have been produced by any thing else; consequently all the cause of its existence must be in itself; and this implies that it is self-existent and independent. Again: that which is self-existent and independent must exist necessarily; for if the cause of its existence has always been in itself, it could not but have existed; otherwise the necessary connection between cause and effect would be destroyed. Hence, if we say that matter existed from eternity, we assert that it existed necessarily; and if its existence was necessary, so were all its parts and properties; for the parts and properties of any substance inhere in the constitution of its essence. It appears, therefore, that if matter is eternal, it must exist necessarily in all its parts and properties. And if so, the particular state in which it exists must be necessary; and then, the same eternal necessity in itself, which determined the state of its existence, must determine its continuance in the same state; consequently if matter had existed from eternity in a chaotic form, it must have continued forever in the same form; and upon that hypothesis the worlds could never have been produced from chaos. Thus the eternity of matter is seen to be unreasonable and absurd. In the second place, to suppose that the world existed from all eternity, in its organized state, is unreasonable.

For, first, if eternal, it must be so in all its parts; and if in all its parts, then the inhabitants thereof are included; but to suppose an eternal succession of animals, would be to suppose an infinite number made up of finite numbers, which would be unreasonable; for we may add as many finite numbers together as we please, yet they never can amount to infinity. ^f1 The present state of improvement in the arts and sciences argues against the eternity of the world. As a natural consequence, each generation may profit by the labors and experience of the preceding one, so that the natural course of improvement from age to age is progressive, but all the great and important inventions and discoveries in the arts and sciences are of comparatively recent origin. To account for this upon the supposition that men have eternally existed upon the earth, would be exceedingly difficult.

Once more: the comparatively modern date of the most ancient records, is another argument against the eternity of the world in its organized state. Had the nations of the earth existed from all eternity, we might reasonably suppose that history, monumental or recorded, would carry us back for multiplied hundreds of centuries. These are only a few of the difficulties with which we find ourselves entangled when, in reference to the origin of the world, we wish to become “wise above what is written.”

II.The date of creation.

According to the Septuagint, the date of creation is placed near six thousand years before Christ; but Archbishop Usher has shown, to the general satisfaction of the learned, that, according to the Hebrew chronology, the creation took place four thousand and four years previous to the birth of Christ. The original Hebrew is certainly better authority than a translation which, like the Septuagint, is admitted to contain many mistakes. Accordingly the computation of Usher has been generally acceded to as correct.

Corroborative testimony to the correctness of this account may be gathered from general history and traditionary legends of the different nations of the earth. None of these, which bear any evidence of authenticity, extend so far as the date of Moses; and from the representation which they make, in reference to the times of their earliest date, the evidence can scarcely be resisted that the world was then in a state of infancy. For a quarter of a century past, there has been awakened, both in Europe and America, an exciting interest on the subject of geology. What has added intensity to this interest is the impression on the minds of many that the principles and facts of that new and interesting department of natural science come in conflict with the teachings of revelation. The avidity with which the skeptical inclinations of some shallow-minded sciolists have led them boastingly to parade the new discoveries of geology as a scientific demonstration discrediting the historic record of Moses in reference to the date of creation, has originated in the minds of many intelligent Christians a suspicious jealousy in reference to geological science. Among our eminent theological writers, Richard Watson, of England, and Moses Stuart, of our own country, threw the weight of their great names in the scale against the pretensions of geology.

It has, however, now become clearly perceptible to the most sober-minded and profound thinkers, both among philosophers and divines, that geological science, as set forth by her ablest devotees, has no principles or facts to array against the teachings of the Bible. Mere empirics in science, as Cowper expressed it, “Drill and bore The solid earth, and from the strata there Extract a register, by which we learn That He who made it, and revealed its date To Moses, was mistaken in its age.” But to pretend that revelation has any thing to fear or to lose by its contact with geology, is evidence at once of the weakness of human reason, and of a lack of correct information on the subjects involved. When the Copernican system of astronomy was first proclaimed, after the shock produced by its novelty had subsided, and the smoke of a fierce but short-lived controversy had been blown away, what loss had revelation sustained? The sun continued to rise and set, and the earth to revolve in her orbit and wheel on her axis, with the same regularity they had observed from the beginning; and the advocates of revelation read the sacred page with a deeper interest, and interpreted its record with a clearer light. Just so it will assuredly be with the discoveries of geology. Light may be shed on the interpretation of the text, producing greater harmony of view in the department of exegesis, but the truth of the record will only stand the more thoroughly vindicated, and the more highly appreciated. From the earliest ages of Christianity to the present day, learned commentators have differed in their interpretation of the record of creation, as given by Moses in the first chapter of Genesis. Without an attempt to decide at present between the claims of these different interpretations, we proceed to show that, according to any of them, all the agreed facts of geology (the most intelligent geologists themselves being judges) may be fully admitted, and yet the record of Moses stand secure-neither disproved, discredited, nor in the least shaken.

1. The interpretation which has ever been the most generally adopted by biblical expositors, is that which is the most literal. It assumes that Moses in the first chapter of Genesis, dates the “beginning” of creation at the commencement of his “six days;” and that during those “days” God called into being from nonentity the entire universe of finite existences, whether material or immaterial.

Now, admitting this to be the proper construction of the language of Moses, how can the facts of geology disprove or invalidate his record? Suppose all the learned geologists in the world were to agree that, according to the time occupied in the formation of the strata of the earth, in all parts where the examination has been made and the time of the formation accertained, the date of creation should be fixed many millions of years anterior to the date of Moses, what reliance could be placed on this description of evidence? Let the philosopher dig his fossil from the earth or rend the granite from the mountain; let him examine its structure, and analyze its essence, and calculate the time requisite for its formation by the action of fire and water, what can he thus prove as to the date of creation? May not the Christian reply, Is not God omnipotent? And was not his creative act a miracle? Might he not therefore, have formed and arranged all those particles just as they now appear in a single day as easily as in a million of centuries? That he could have so done, none can deny: that he did not so do, geology has not proved, and, in the nature of things, cannot prove. Where, then, is the skeptical argument against the record of Moses? It is scattered to the winds.

Creation, in all its parts, had a beginning: men, trees, and plants, no more certainly than rocks. Man was not made first an infant, but he appeared at once in the maturity and perfection of his powers. And who can doubt that the trees of paradise were originally created in fruit-bearing maturity? Why might we not build a similar argument from the bones and muscles of Adam the next morning after his creation, and prove thereby that he was then fifty or two hundred years old? Or, from an examination of the folds in the wood of a tree of paradise an hour after it was spoken into being, why might we not, by the same mode of argument, demonstrate that it was the growth of a century? If, therefore, God could form the body of man in all its bones, sinews, and muscles, and the wood of the tree in all its folds, circles, and texture, just as they would subsequently appear after passing by a regular process of years to maturity, could he not create the rocks and fossil remains of geology in a similar way? Let the skeptic answer the question.

If it he argued, that for the regular formation of the earth, for its transition from a fluid to a solid state, and for the production of its peculiar structure, a period immensely longer is requisite than that allowed by the “six days” of Moses-if this position be urged, may it not be replied that the infinite power of God could have accomplished the whole work, however complicated and stupendous, just as easily in an hour as in millions of years? To speak of a great length of time being requisite for perfecting the work of creation, is manifestly inconsistent with a correct understanding of the divine perfections.

Admit the alleged facts of geology-admit that these facts, sufficiently numerous and pertinent, have been so established as to remove all doubt from the position that the earth is immensely more than six thousand years old-what then? Has the Bible been discredited? Has the Mosaic record been demonstrated a myth, a fable, or a fraud? By no means. The citadel of revelation can sustain a thousand such assaults, and its foundation not be shaken nor its pillars give way. But Christianity is not shut up to the literal interpretation of the Mosaic record of creation.

2. Another method of interpreting the first chapter of Genesis, is to assume that the phrase “in the beginning,” with which the chapter opens, is to be understood as referring to a period immensely distant in the past, in which “God created the heaven and the earth”-a period far removed from the “six days” of which Moses speaks.

Now, if this interpretation be allowed, what more is requisite to bring the geological into full harmony with the biblical record? Admit that Moses does not fix the epoch of the creation of matter; that an interval of indefinite length may have preceded the six days’ work-admit this, and if those “six days” may have been natural days, What more do we need? That this is sufficient to harmonize the geological with the biblical record, some of the most eminent geologists have conceded; among whom we may mention Dr. J. Pye Smith, Dr. Buckland, Dr. Harris, Dr. King, Prof. Sedgwick, and various others.

Although the theory here under review has been adopted very generally by Christian geologists, it is not indebted to that modern science for its origin. It was sanctioned by learned commentators in the early ages of Christianity. It was adopted by Augustin, Theodoret, Justin Martyr, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, and Origen, In more modern times, it was favored by Bishops Patrick, Horsley, and Gleig, as also by Baumgarten, and many others.

Dr. Chalmers has likewise thrown the weight of his great name in favor of this theory. He says: “The detailed history of creation, in the first chapter of Genesis, begins at the middle of the second verse; and what precedes might be understood as an introductory sentence, by which we are most appositely told both that God created all things at the first, and that afterward-by what interval of time is not specified-the earth lapsed into a chaos, from the darkness and disorder of which the present system or economy of things was made to arise. Between the initial act and the details of Genesis, the world, for aught we know, might have been the theater of many revolutions, the traces of which geology may still investigate.”

3. Another theory on the subject is, that the six demiurgic days are to be construed as metaphorical days, each implying an indefinite but long period-perhaps thousands of years. This view of the subject was sanctioned by Josephus, Philo, Augustin, and the Venerable Bede. In Germany, it was adopted by Hahn, Hensler, and Knapp. In England, it has been advocated by Professors Lee and Wait, of Cambridge University; in Scotland, by Hugh Miller; and by Bush, Barrows, and Hitchcock, in this country.

Some of the abettors of this theory, while they contend that the demiurgic days should be construed metaphorically-representing a long period-yet concede that Moses understood them as literal days. Thus they suppose that he, like some of the prophets, understood not the full import of the things he was inspired to write; and that, like as prophecy is explained by the developments of history, so the record of Moses concerning the past finds its illustration in the developments of geology. Probably most intelligent Christians of the present day will be inclined, with Chalmers, to favor the second theory of interpretation which we have presented in regard to the Mosaic record of creation; but whatever may be our decision in this respect, we need have no apprehension that the Bible can suffer from scientific discovery or investigation. What though the mere sciolist may seize upon geology as unfriendly to revelation, yet the more thoroughly its facts and principles become known and understood, the more manifest becomes the truth that, like the developments of astronomy, they only tend to the elucidation and confirmation of the Bible record.

III. The extent of creation is the next point to be considered. A question of interest to some minds, though entirely speculative in its character, is this: Are we to suppose that Moses gives an account of the entire creation of God, or merely of our world and those worlds with which we are more or less connected, while many other systems of worlds throughout the immensity of space may have been created perhaps millions of ages anterior to that date? On the one hand it has been said that to suppose the Almighty to have remained alone, a solitary being amid immensity, from all eternity, till a few thousand years ago, without once putting forth his creative energies, does not comport with a rational view of the wonder working Jehovah.

Again, it is argued that “the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy,” at the birth of creation; and that, as we may conclude from the history of the fall, the angels must have been created some time previous to the Mosaic creation, that sufficient time may be allowed for their apostasy and subsequent early attack upon man in paradise. To all this, it has been replied, first, that however long the period which we suppose creation to have commenced previous to the “six days” of Moses, still, if it had a commencement at all, there must have been an eternity before it commenced, and, therefore, the Deity must have existed alone just as long as if nothing had been created till the “six days” specified by Moses; unless we say that one eternity is longer than another, which is absurd. Again, with regard to the angels rejoicing at the birth of creation, it is replied that they might have been created on the first or second day, or among the first of God’s works, and so have been ready to rejoice as they saw the different parts of creation rising up after them. As to their having had time to fall from their first estate, and appear so early in paradise to seduce our first parents, it is replied that none can tell how suddenly they may have rebelled and been expelled from heaven, or how long man may have existed in paradise before he was visited by the tempter. Upon so difficult a question we would scarce volunteer an opinion. This much, at least, seems clear, that the entire system of which our world forms a part, was created in the “six days.”

Again, it has been asked, Is creation limited in extent, or is it spread our infinitely throughout the immensity of space? To this, we may be allowed to reply that, as creation must be finite in its different parts, it cannot be infinite in the aggregate; for infinity cannot be made up of finite parts; therefore, whatever we may say as to the unlimited nature of simple space, we conclude that the creation of God must be limited in its extent. At the same time that we avow the belief that the creation of God is not absolutely unlimited in extent, we must also admit that we have abundant reason to infer that the works of God are vast and extensive. This world of ours is only a speck, compared with the numerous and extensive orbs connected with our own system. How exceedingly small, then, must it appear, when we embrace in our contemplation those numerous systems which we may suppose to be spread out amid the vast expanse around us! To suppose that the Creator had formed so great a number of mighty globes for no grand and important purpose, would directly impeach his wisdom; therefore, the reasonable inference is, that they are peopled by an innumerable multitude of intelligent beings, brought into existence by the power of Omnipotence, for the wise and good purpose of showing forth the perfections and glory of Him who “filleth all in all.” But we now inquire more particularly concerning the intelligent part of creation. So far as our information has extended, the intelligent creation may all be embraced in two classes-angels and men. The Bible furnishes some account of the history, character, and employment of these two classes of beings; and we will endeavor to ascertain, to some extent, the important information within our reach on this interesting theme. We reserve, however, for a subsequent chapter, the consideration of the primeval state of man.

ANGELS. The term angel is from the Greek angelos, and signifies, primarily, not a nature, but an office. It means a messenger, or one sent on an embassy. But the term is very generally used in Scripture to denote a superior order of intelligences inhabiting the heavenly regions. Here, on the very threshold of the subject, we are met by a skeptical objection. Some have even denied the very existence of such beings. In the twenty-third chapter and eighth verse of the Acts, we learn that the Sadducees denied the existence of angels and spirits. This ancient heresy has had its advocates in almost every, age of the world, even among professed believers in revelation. As the Scriptures in numerous passages speak of angels as intelligent and real beings, those who have denied their real existence have been compelled to explain all these passages in a figurative sense. Thus, when unholy angels are spoken of, we are told that nothing is implied but evil principles or unholy thoughts; and when holy angels are spoken of, we are told that nothing is meant but good principles or holy thoughts. To such as make thus free with their Bibles, and entirely subvert, by so palpable an absurdity, the plainest declarations of Scripture, we would only say, Go on, if you choose. If the plain account of Scripture does not convince you of the real existence of angels, to reason with you would be perfectly useless. Indeed, if the entire Bible history of the existence and doings of angels is an allegory or figure, we may as well discard the whole volume of revelation as an idle dream or a silly fable. From the Bible we learn that there are two descriptions of angels-fallen or unholy spirits, and holy or good spirits. We inquire briefly concerning each.

1. OF UNHOLY ANGELS. That these, as they proceeded from the hand of the Creator, were both holy and happy beings, we may clearly infer from the divine character. He who is perfectly holy and good could not have produced unholy and miserable beings. His nature forbids it. In confirmation of this truth, we read in the first of Genesis: “And God saw every thing that he had made, and behold, it was very good.” Well may we be assured that every creature, as it first came from the creating hand, was free from the least taint of moral evil. That these evil angels were once holy and happy, and fell from that exalted state, is clearly taught in the following passages:-John 8:44 : “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do; he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth; because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; for he is a liar, and the father of it.” Jude 1:6 : “And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day.” 2 Peter 2:4 : “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.” From these texts we learn that the devil “abode not in the truth,” (implying that he was once in it,) and that the sinning angels left their original habitation, and are now dwellers in the regions of darkness. These are the plain scriptural facts. The question has often been asked, How came they to sin? There has been much curious speculation in endeavoring to account for the origin of moral evil. That the angels were under a law, is clear from the fact that they sinned; and if under a law which it was possible for them to violate, they must have been in a state of trial and accountability to God. With all these facts in reference to their condition before us, we see no more difficulty in accounting for their fall than for the fall of man, except that no foreign tempter could have seduced the former. Here we are asked, How could they fall into sin without being first tempted? And how could they be tempted, when, as yet, there was nothing evil in the universe? Thus much we may say in their case:

First, that they did sin and fall, the Scriptures declare.

Second, that there was no evil being in the universe to tempt them to sin, we may clearly infer from the Scriptures. But how it was that they sinned without being tempted; or, if self-tempted, how they could have originated the temptation within their own nature, which as yet was holy, perhaps we cannot fully comprehend; but the facts are revealed, and we are compelled to believe them. Some light, however, may be reflected upon this subject, when we remember that the possibility of sinning is essential to a state of accountability. And, therefore, to say that God could not make it possible for angels to sin, without first creating moral evil, would be to say that God could not create a moral accountable agent, which would be alike irreconcilable with the divine character and the Bible testimony. Having premised these things, in reference to the fall of angels, we would now inquire concerning their nature, employment, and destiny.

(1) THEIR NATURE. That they are spiritual beings, is evident from the Scriptures: “He maketh his angels spirits;” but to comprehend the precise manner in which these spiritual essences exist, is, with us, impossible. That they are unholy and unhappy is also clearly manifest from the place of their present habitation; they are said to be “reserved in chains under darkness,” and to have been “cast down to Tartarus, or hell.” As hell is represented to be their principal abode, and that by way of punishment for their sin, we see that they are in a state of torment; but we are not to infer that they are absolutely confined to their prison. This, the history of the fall of man, as well as many other parts of the Scriptures, contradicts. They are capable of visiting our world, and perhaps other parts of the universe; but wherever they may be, they are still “unclean spirits, seeking rest and finding none.” They cannot escape from their wretchedness.

(2) EMPLOYMENT. The Bible teaches us something concerning the employment of these spirits.

First. They are sometimes permitted to afflict the bodies of men. This we learn from the history of Job. Satan was the agent by whom he was grievously afflicted with disease. We learn the same from the many diseased persons in the days of our Saviour, said to be possessed of devils.

It has been alleged, it is true, that these were not really and literally possessed of devils, but that they were diseased with epilepsy, palsy, madness, etc.; and that they were figuratively said to be “possessed of devils.” To this we would reply, in the language of Dr. Campbell, of Scotland: “When we find mention made of the number of demons in particular possessions, their actions so expressly distinguished from those of the men possessed, conversations held by the former in regard to the disposal of them after their expulsion, and accounts given how they were actually disposed of; when we find diseases and passions ascribed peculiarly to them, and similitudes taken from the conduct which they usually observe, it is impossible to deny their existence, Without admitting that the sacred historians were either deceived themselves with regard to them, or intended to deceive their readers.”

Second. They are permitted to exercise an evil influence over the minds and hearts of men, as appears from the following passages:-

Ephesians 6:12 : “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Revelation 20:7-8 : “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison; and shall go out to deceive the nations.” 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 : “Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish.” In Ephesians 2:2, Satan is called “the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience.” In 2 Corinthians 2:11, St. Paul says, “we are not ignorant of his devices;” and in 1 Peter 5:8, he is said to be “as a roaring lion, walking about, seeking whom he may devour.” From these scriptures we learn that evil spirits are endeavoring, by diligent and persevering effort, to destroy the souls of men; but for our encouragement be it known, that they can only go the length of their chain. They can tempt, but they cannot coerce us to sin; and we are told to “resist the devil, and he will flee from us.”

(3) THEIR DESTINY.

We learn from the Scriptures that these evil spirits are “reserved in chains, under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day.” Again, the place of “everlasting fire,” to which the wicked are to be sentenced at judgment, is said to be “prepared for the devil and his angels.” From all which we infer that, though they are now in torment, they are reserved for the judgment, when a more dismal doom awaits them. For them there is no redemption, no mercy, no hope. The question has been asked, Why might not provision have been made for their recovery? It is enough to know that God, who always does right, has passed them by. They sinned against light and knowledge. Each stood or fell for himself alone. And while the justice of God shall be displayed in their eternal destruction, his goodness is no more impeached than it will be in the punishment of wicked men. In reference to both classes, it may be said, they had a fair trial, but they chose the evil, and must “eat the fruit of their doings.”

2. HOLY ANGELS.

We come in the next place to inquire concerning holy angels. In reference to them, various items of information may be gained from the Bible.

(1) We speak of their character and condition.

First. They are possessed of a high degree of intelligence and wisdom. In 2 Samuel 14:17, we find the woman of Tekoah speaking to David as follows: “As an angel of God, so is my lord the king to discern good and bad.” Their superior intelligence may be inferred, 1. From their spirituality. They are not clogged by the frailties of weak and perishing bodies.

2. From the place of their abode. They “ever behold the face of God” in glory, and dwell amid the effulgence of heavenly light.

3. From their long observation and experience. For multiplied ages they have been gazing in sweet contemplation on the unfolding attributes of Deity, and winging their unwearied flight to various and distant parts of God’s dominions, to execute the divine command, and witness the wonders of the divine administration. To what lofty heights must they be elevated in knowledge and wisdom! Subjects the most mysterious to the strongest intellect of man, may all be spread out to the view of a seraph with the clearness of the light of day.

Second. They are holy beings. In Matthew 25:31, they are called “the holy angels;” and that they have never departed, in the least, from the path of rectitude, we infer from the petition in the Lord’s Prayer: “Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.” Again, we infer their holiness from the place of their residence. No unclean thing can enter heaven; but, for at least six thousand years, they have been veiling their faces before the throne, and crying out, with reverential humility, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts.”

Third. They are possessed of great activity and strength. In Psalms 103:20, we read: “Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength.” It is true they derive all their strength from Jehovah, but he has endued them with astonishing power. The destroying angel smote the first-born in the Egyptian families; and some of the most signal judgments of God have been executed by angelic ministers. Again, with what astonishing velocity may we suppose, they can transport themselves from world to world! They are represented as flying on wings, and as they are purely spiritual in their nature, we may suppose that they can fly with the velocity of thought. We have an instance of this in the ninth chapter of Daniel. When Daniel commenced his prayer, the angel Gabriel was commanded to fly swiftly from heaven, and ere the supplication was closed, he touched Daniel, “about the time of the evening oblation.”

Fourth. They possess uninterrupted happiness. This we infer from the holiness of their nature, as well as from their constant communion with God in the climes of bliss. They can have no remorse for the past, no fearful apprehensions of the future. They drink immortal joys from the pure fount of bliss, and feast forever on the enrapturing visions of the divine glory.

(2) We next inquire concerning their employment.

First. They are used as agents in the affairs of Divine Providence. In reference to this, Milton has said:

“Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth Unseen, both when we wake and when we sleep.” An instance of angelic agency in the affairs of Providence is seen in the book of Daniel 10:13. “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days; but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me.” But one of the most striking instances of the power of an angelic minister is, perhaps, the destruction of the hosts of Sennacherib, who had defied the living God. 2 Kings 19:35 : “It came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand; and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses,” It has been supposed that this destruction was caused by the pestilential wind so fatal in the East; but if so, the angel was the agent used by Providence in bringing the wind, at the time, as an instrument of death, more terrible than the sword.

Second. In the next place, holy angels are used as ministering spirits to the saints.

1.In revealing to them the divine will. As instances of this, we have the cases of Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel. The revelation of the prophetic history of the Church was made to St. John, in Patmos, through the ministry of an angel.

2.They watch over the saints to preserve them from evil. In Psalms 91:10; Psalms 91:12, we read: “There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling. For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.” And in Psalms 34:7, we read: “The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them.” In Matthew 18:10, our Saviour says: “Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.” Again, in Hebrews 1:14, we read: “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” The ministry of angels to the saints is fully taught in the above passages. We are not, however, to infer that they are to preserve the saints from every calamity of life; for afflictions and trials are necessary for the perfecting of the saints, for the maturing of their graces, and fitting them for glory. But they are about our path continually. They are with us when we sleep and when we are awake, to preserve us from evil, and to encircle us with an invisible wall of protection.

3.They convey the souls of the saints to the mansions of bliss. They attend them through life as their guard and protection, commissioned from their heavenly Father, to comfort them in distress, to deliver them from their enemies, and accompany them in all their weary pilgrimage; but when the hour of death arrives, they wait around the expiring saint to bear his spirit home to God. This is beautifully illustrated in Luke 16:22 : when Lazarus died, it is said, “he was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom.” We look upon death as a scene of sorrow and distress; but only let the veil that hides from our view the invisible world be removed, and we should see, in the presence of the dying Christian, angelic bands, with the sweet melody of heavenly harps, commingling with the sobs and groans of weeping friends, and softly whispering, “Sister spirit, come away.” Truly may we say, “The chamber where the good man meets his fate Is privileged beyond the common walk Of virtuous life, quite in the verge of heaven.”

4. But, lastly, they shall minister to the saints at the last day, when the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised. The Lord “shall send forth his angels with a mighty sound of a trumpet, to gather together his elect” from the four quarters of the earth, and by them shall all the saints “be caught up to meet the Lord in the air.”

Much more might be said, but we have given a faint outline of the condition and employment of the angelic intelligences, as revealed in the Scriptures. How noble and exalted a portion are these celestial beings of the wonderful works of the great Creator! How large and extended views must they have of the infinite wisdom and goodness of God! How profound their adoration, and how increasingly so, as they continually witness the beautiful developments of love and power in the wide universe of God’s creation and providence! How glorious is their employment! Day and night they are fulfilling their Maker’s high behests, not as a dull task, but as a sweet and living pleasure. Lord, aid us, that we may “do thy will on earth, as the angels do it in heaven!”