for it is not so much as once named, or alluded to, during a period of more than 800 years. Will it be said, can it possibly be believed, that Samuel and David, and all the pious kings and peoplethat the whole Jewish nation, utterly neglected that essential seal of the covenant, for eight centuries? The supposition cannot be admitted for a moment. And how then can any fair reasoner argue, from the alleged silence of a portion of the sacred history, still more concise, that Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, kept no Sabbath, because the fact is not expressly stated. Other examples, having the same bearing on the question before us, might be adduced; but it cannot be necessary. It is a case in which two are as good as two hundred.

Having thus, as we believe, fairly put to rest the objection against the early date of the Sabbath, drawn from the alleged silence of the historian, we proceed to show, that it certainly bears date from the creation of the world itself.

First, from the order of the sacred narration. Having celebrated the handy-work of the Creator, in a regular and connected narrative, from the first day, up to the sixth and last; Moses proceeds in the same manner, without giving the least intimation of any change of time or meaning, to inform us, that on the seventh day God rested from all his work, and that he blessed and sanctified the day. When did he rest? On the seventh day, that is, the seventh day of the world. And if God's resting was a reason why men should rest at all, then

it was a reason why the holy observance of the Sabbath should commence at that time.

Again; the consecration of the Sabbath, evidently took place on the very day when God rested from all his work, and not 2500 years, nor one. year, nor one week, afterward. If the Sabbath was instituted to commemorate the stupendous work of creation, (and who can doubt it,) what can be more improbable, (may we not say absurd,) than the supposition, that this commemorative ordinance was never heard of, was not even appointed, till the world was two thousand and five hundred years old?

How is it in all other parallel cases? The miraculous deliverance of Israel from Egypt, was commemorated in the annual feast of the passover, from the very night of that great deliverance. In like manner, the independence of these United States, has been annually celebrated, from the date of the solemn declaration itself. And so it is with respect to all those events, which are thought worthy of being statedly commemorated. The celebration always commences at, or near the time of the event. How strange, how incredible the supposition then, that the solemn consecration of a day to commemorate the creation of the world should form a solitary exception.

On this ground, we might safely rest the question, till some better reason than we have ever yet seen, can be offered, to invalidate the position which we have taken. But as so much depends upon this point, we shall offer a few additional remarks, to expose the weakness of the opposite side

of the question. If the Sabbath was not instituted in paradise, nor until after the departure of Israel from Egypt, what occasion had Moses to mention it at all, in connexion with his account of the creation, which took place between two and three thousand years before? Why did he not wait, till, as Dr. Paley supposes, the Sabbath was actually instituted in the wilderness; and there give it its proper place in the narrative? Why place events side by side in the history, which, according to the supposition we are controverting, had no connexion in fact, but were separated by the mighty chasm of twenty-five centuries! Surely, the Spirit of God never could have directed Moses to an arrangement in this solitary instance, so contrary to the regular order of the narration, and so much better calculated to mislead, than to instruct the reader. And yet the ingenuity of Paley could devise no better way to dispose of the passage which we have quoted from the second chapter of Genesis. It must, he thought, have been inserted there, not because the Sabbath was then instituted, but by way of a twenty-five hundred years' anticipation!

But let us see where this strange interpretation will lead us. Is the creation of the world itself recorded in the first chapter of Genesis by way of anticipation? It must be so, if Dr. Paley's reasoning, in regard to the Sabbath, is correct. For the same inspired writer, who tells us that God said, "Let there be light, and there was light," on the first day, and that Adam was created on the sixth day, is equally explicit in declaring, that on the

seventh day, God rested from all his work, and blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. There being no difference, therefore, in the phraseology, we must suppose that the order of time is expressed in the latter case, as definitely as in either of the former. That is, if we understand the sacred historian to speak in the second chapter of Genesis, not of what actually took place at the time, but of what was to be done after the lapse of twenty five hundred years, then, to be consistent, we must suppose that, in the first chapter, he speaks of man, not as being then created, but to be created at some future and far distant period. And so we shall have the heavens and the earth created, not at the time specified in the inspired narrative, but two or three thousand years afterward; that is, after they were created; and all this just by way of anticipation!

That the Sabbath was not first given to the Israelites in the wilderness, as a new institution, we argue

Secondly; from the very passage in the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, on which the main reliance has been placed, to prove that no Sabbath was known to mankind till that time: "And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, (i. e. twice as much manna, as on any preceding day,) two omers for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, this is that which the Lord hath said, 'To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; bake that which ye will bake,' &c."

The first question suggested by this passage is, Why did the people gather twice as much food on the sixth day, as they had gathered on the fourth, or the fifth? It does not appear from the history that a syllable had been said to them on the subject. And that they actually made this double provision, on the sixth day, of their own accord, we infer from two considerations. First-"The rulers went and told Moses," as if something unexpected had happened, which required his particular direction. Secondly--Moses answered them, just as if he had never alluded to the subject before: This is that which the Lord hath said, fc. The probability arising from these circumstances is very strong, therefore, that the people had some previous knowledge of the Sabbath, unless we can suppose they foresaw that God, after giving mankind all their time for 2500 years, was now about to appropriate one seventh part to himself, and so resolved to anticipate him in the new arrangement!

Further; our supposition, that the Jewish lawgiver here speaks of the Sabbath, as an institution already known, though, perhaps, greatly neglected, and almost forgotten, is, we think, very much strengthened, by the phraseology of the passage just quoted. "This is that which the Lord hath said, to-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath." It is not thus, that legislators are wont to speak in the first promulgation of their laws; but it is precisely as men speak every day, concerning existing institutions. We say, familiarly, that "tomorrow is the Sabbath," because it is an old insti