of God in the arrangement. tion showed the kind consideration litate the flight of the manslayer, and give him every advantage if hotly pursued to secure his reaching the refuge. Their situation gave every possible advantage. They stood three on each side Jordan, that no wide river might hinder access to them. They stood all in plains or on level ground, that no high hill might have to be mounted by the wearied manslayer near his journey's end. On the eastern side of Jordan, "Bezer in the wilderness, in the plain country of the Reubenites" (Josh. xx. 8), stood on the open heath; Ramoth in Gilead, at the foot of the hills of Gilead; and Golan, at the base of the hills of Bashan. On the western side of Jordan, Kedesh, in the plains of Zaanannim; Shechem, in the plains of Moreh; and Hebron, in a level wilderness. Each city (excepting Bezer, which had no need) was marked by some lofty hill or hills rising near it, which served as a landmark for the manslayer at a great distance. Thus Ramoth had the heights of Gilead and Golan, those of Bashan rising close at hand; Kedesh had the hill of Naphtali; Shechem had mount Gerizim; and Hebron the table land from which Abram watched the destruction of the cities of the plain. They were so placed, also, in reference to the length and breadth of the land, as to afford most ready and almost equally near access from every part of the country. The roads to them were kept constantly in good repair; the gates were always open; and directing posts or pillars were erected at convenient distances, having the word "REFUGE" in large characters upon them. All this was to faci Whoever fled to these cities had a right of instant admission, but could not be allowed to remain as a resident until he had passed through a solemn and strict trial. If he were proved guilty of murder, he was directly given up to justice; but if proved the unwitting manslayer, was at once entitled to the protections of the place. Here he was safe for his life, or until the death of the high priest, when he might come out and return to his home. While in the city he was forced to follow some occupation and support himself, or find the means for it; the place only gave protection from danger, but provided for no idleness, and conferred no pecuniary benefit. The full laws of these cities of refuge may be found in Numb. xxxv. 9-35, and Deut. xix. 1—13. We cannot close this brief answer to "L. M.'s" inquiry, without directing her attention to the fine type and picture these cities of refuge present of Christ, the true sanctuary for each law-pursued sinner to fly to, and escape from the wrath to come. FOURTH QUESTION. "Explain the statement about Melchisedec, Heb. vii. 3." ANSWER BY J. H. The passage refers to the priesthood, not the person, of Christ. Without father means literally one who has no father, whose father is dead, or whose father is unknown. glory. Hannah said, 1 Sam. ii. 1, The apostle did not use the word in any of these meanings, for there is no evidence that Melchisedec was fatherless in any of these respects. The Jews thought it was very important that the line of their priesthood should be carefully kept, and that their genealogies should be correctly marked and preserved, and their direct descent from Aaron should be clearly and distinctly shown. There was no genealogical table in regard to Melchisedec, neither was there of Christ. The apostle states it is distinctly said (Psa. cx. 4) that the Messiah was to be a priest according to his order; and in this respect there is a remarkable resemblance, so far as the point of his being a priest was concerned. The Messiah as a priest stood alone. His name does not appear in the line of priests. No one of his ancestors is mentioned as a priest. This should not, therefore, be construed as meaning that the genealogy of Christ could not be traced out, which is not true, for Matthew (chap. i.) and Luke (chap. iii.) have carefully preserved it, but that he had no genealogical record as a priest.See Barnes on the Hebrews. FIFTH QUESTION. "What is the meaning of 'Mine horn hast thou exalted ?"" "Mine horn is exalted in the Lord:" or paraphrastically, "The Lord hath greatly honoured me, in answering my prayer, and giving me a son." David's horn was exalted, "in the kingdom being established in his hand, and unto his family, and power and glory thereby increased unto him.” Christ is the horn of our salvation, for He alone it is who has power and strength to save, and to Him alone is all the honour and glory of salvation due. There is another way of explaining the passage:— Horns are worn by some of the people in the East as head ornaments, indicative of rank; and also by the women of Lebanon. In times of mourning these horns are turned down or removed altogether, but in times of rejoicing kept erect. The exaltation of the horn thus becomes the symbol of joy and triumph. SIXTH QUESTION. "What was 'the trespass-offering?'" ANSWER BY B. The trespass-offering was always a ram (see Lev. v. 15; vi. 6, 7), and differed from the sin-offering in being offered for cases of sin of a more private character, and confined to the individual's knowledge. The cases it had reference to were always those of fraud, and comprised those of 1. Fraud towards God in the matter of his worship (v. 16, 17); and ANSWER BY T. F. In the horn consists the principal strength and power of some animals, and the honour and glory of others, 2. Fraud towards man in the matter and from these ideas the word is used metaphorically in many places, to signify either honour, power, or of his dealings (vi. I—7). Whenever a man was conscious of such fraud, though none knew it but himself, he was required by the law of the trespass-offering to bring the atonement for his sin. The design of this law was evidently to keep the people's conscience tender, and teach them that God would be honoured even in the most secret actions, and not hold him guiltless who should defraud or disobey, however privately and unknown. In these cases of defrauding, complete restitution was to be made by the offending party, with a double tithe, a fifth part of the value of the principal, superadded, before he could look for the forgiveness of his God. In the ceremonies connected with the offering of this sacrifice some difference was observed from those of the sin-offerings. Thus, the blood 66 itself. The thirty-first chapter contains the statement by Moses that he is the author of the book which he there concludes, and that beside it he wrote the song contained in the thirty-second chapter, as well as the promises relating to it, found in the thirty-third. This is all of Moses's the book contains, while the last chapter must have been added by some one else. The connexion also which evidently exists between the last chapter of Deuteronomy and the first of Joshua shows it to have been a subsequent composition, probably added by the author of the book of Joshua, in order to form a sort of transition chapter between the two books. I. How are we to understand 1 Pet. iii. 18-20? W. J. P. was to be put on the sides" of the QUESTIONS FOR SEPTEMBER. altar, and not on the horns, as in the case of sin-offerings; this showing that the sin was of a less public character. The flesh also might be eaten by any person, and out of the tabernacle. SEVENTH QUESTION. "How could Moses write the book of Deuteronomy, when it records his death?" ANSWER BY HENRY. The thirty-fourth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy, in which the record of the death of Moses occurs, is to be taken as a supplement by another writer. The whole of this section is manifestly, from a very slight examination, to be taken as a thing apart and by itself. This is confirmed not only from the contents of the chapter, but also from the express statement of the book II. In what sense may it be said that Satan, having taken Jesus Christ to an exceeding high mountain, showed to him there all the kingdoms of the world? III. Why is it said that "God did tempt Abraham," when it is also said "God tempteth no man?" T. H. IV. Can any of your readers inform me the exact size (in superficial measure) of the tabernacle, the first and second temple, and the difference, separately and collectively, between them and the Great WM. B., JUN. Exhibition? |