rising waters, ho woulr~ lrnv~ done so by worrh, "And every man," as in the prc,;ent snying thnt " nil the !ugh hills under tho exposition. Thus far the Clllamity ia simply wholo hcnvcn woro covered." While, then, viewed in its objectivo result. In the worcl3 H is ndmittctl thnt tho words me.y depict n which follow, which wear the aspect of an comploto submorgcnco of tho globe, it is unnecessary repetition, it is re~arded in its ml\intaincd by mnny competent 6cholnrs that relation to the Divine thrcatemng. the necessities of exegesis only demand a Ver. 23. -And every living substance pl\ttio.l inundl\tion (Poole, Murphy, Tayler was d'estroyed-litcrally, wiped out (cf. eh. Lewis, • Spanker's Commento.ry,' Inglis). vi. 7 ; vii. 4 )-which was upon the face of Vor. 20.-Fifteen onbits upward-half the ground, both man, and-literally, from the height of. the ark-did the wo.tera pre- man unto-cattle, and the creeping things, vail. Literally, become str011,(J; above the and the fowl of the heaven; and 1.hey were highest mountains obviously, and not above destroyed-wiped out by wa.shing 'cf. eh. vi. the ground simply; as, on the latter alterna- 7)-from the earth : and Noa\ only re- tive, it could scarcely have been added, and mained alive, and they that wern with him the mountains were covered. in the ark. The straits to which the ad\"0- Vera. 21, 22 describe the effect of the cates of the documentary hypothesis are Deluge in its destruction of all animal and sometimes reduced are remarkably exem- human life. And all flesh died that moved plified by the fortunes of these veTscs (21- upon the earth. A general expression for the 23) in the attempt to assign them to their e.nima.1 creation, of which the particulars are respective authors. Astruc conjectures that then specified. Both of fowl, and of cattle, ver. 21 was taken from what he calls monu- and of beast, and of every creeping thing mentum B, ver. 22 from " monument" that creepeth on the earth. Literally, in A, and ver. 23 from monument C. Eichhorn fowl, and in cattle, &c. (cf. ver. 14). And ascribes vers. 21, 22 to e.n Elohistic author, every mo.n. I. e. all the human race (with nnd ver. 23 to a J ehovistic. Ilgen assigns the exception of the inmates of the ark), vers. 21, 22 to the first, and ver. 23 to the which is further characterised as all in second Elohist. Bleek, e.11 three tn the Ela- whose nostrils was the breath of life. hist; nncl Davidson ver. 21 to the Elohist, Literally, the breath of the spirit of lives, vcrs. 22, 23 to the J ehovist. A.micl such i. e. all mankind. A clear pointing back- uncertainty it will be reasonable to cling to wards to eh. ii. 7, which lee.de Davidson to the belief that Moses ,vrote all the three ascribe vers. 22, 23 to the J ehovist, although verses, at least till the higher criticism knows Eichhorn, Tuch, Bleck, Vaihinger, and others its own mind. lee.ve them in the fundamento.l document, Ver. 24.-And the waters prevailed upon but which is rather to be regarded as a the earth a.n hundred and fifty days. Addi- proof of tl1e interne.l unity of the book. tional to the forty days of rain (Murphy), Of all that was in the dry le.nd,-a further making 190 since the commencement of the specification of the creatures that perished Flood; or more probably inclusive of the in the Flood,-died. It is obvious the con- forty clays (Knobel, Le.nge, Bush, Wordsworth, struction of vers. 21, 22 may be differently 'Speaker's Comment.,' Inglis), which, reckon- understood. Each verse may be taken as a ing thirty days to the month, would bring the separate sentence, as iu the A. V. 1 or the landing of the ark to the seventeenth day of eecond sentence may commenco with the the seventh month, ns stated in eh. viii. 4.
HOMILETICS. Ver. 19.-Was the Flood universal 1 I. THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNT. Unquestionably the language of the historian appears to describe a complete submergence of the globe beneath a flood of waters, and is capable of being so understood, so far as tixegesis can determine. Unquestionably also that this was the writer's meaning would never have been challenged had it not been for certain difficulties of a. scientific nature, ns well as of other kinds, which were gradually seen to attach to such hypothesis. But these difficulties ha.ving arisen in men's minds led to a closer and more careful investigation of the Scriptu10 narrative, when it was found-I. That the language of the historian did not necessarily imply that the catnstrophe described was of universal extent (vide Exposition). 2. Thnt, if it had been only partial and local in its operation, in all probability the same, or at least closely similar, terms would have been selected to depict its appearance, as observed by a. spectator. 3. That the purpose for which, according to the inspired record, the Deluge was sent could have been completely effected without the submergence of the entire globe- that purpose being the destruction of the human race, which, it is believed, had not 120 TllE llOOR: OF GENEStS. ten. vn. 11-24.