never had in view, probably, any such general names for their compositions.

The present acceptation of "testament," as the word is commonly used among us, is--a will; a document by which we establish a claim to a legacy. And this same definition may attach to it, with some degree of propriety, as it is employed in relation to the two principal divisions of the Bible;-i. e. if we regard them as containing stipulations of our heavenly inheritance, embodying the Will of our Father, and in which we feel persuaded we may

"Read our title clear To mansions in the skies."

Nevertheless, some Biblical commentators, who were also profound adepts in philological criticism, have rather questioned the strict accuracy of the name testament, when applied to either of the two grand distinctions of the Scriptures. They conceive that the phrase covenant is more truly expressive of the character of the writings, considering the civil and religious polity of the Jews, derived from Moses, as the first covenant made by the Deity between himself and mankind, and the Gospel of Jesus the second. Should I dare be so presumptuous as to express my own opinion on this point, I should say that I doubted the strict propriety of either term.

Paul makes use of the phrase "old testament" in one instance, where he evidently has reference, not to the whole compilation of scripture by that name, but only to that portion which contains the record of the Mosaic ritual or dispensation. Speaking of those who

still adhered to Judaism, after Christianity had beer taught, he gave it as his opinion that "their minds were blinded," (as, in one sense, the children of Israel were, when Moses veiled his face before them,) "for," says: he, "until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament."*

2

The Jewish people were accustomed to style their sacred writings, which form the first of the two general divisions of our Bible, The Scriptures, or The Law and The Prophets. They were not written (as we might be led to suppose they were, from the manner in which they are now sometimes spoken of,) at one and the same time, with a perfect understanding and mutual consultation between their several authors. Contrary to this idea, according to the best information we can obtain, they were composed at different periods, more or less distant from each other, during a space of more than one thousand years;-and they were not collected and placed together in methodical order in one volume, until the time of EZRA, a Jewish high priest, who flourished about five or six hundred years before Christ, and who compiled and arranged the Jewish scriptural canon, to be read in the synagogue, upon each seventh day; which canon is thought to have been the same with the Old Testament as it now stands,-with the exception of one or two of the minor prophetic books, supposed to have been written some time afterwards.

Excepting some parts of Ezra and Daniel, (generally

2 Corinthians, iii. 14.

conceded to have been written in Chaldee) and the Pentateuch, (which, on account of its great historical importance, I shall make the subject of a separate lecture) the Old Testament was written originally, according to the best authorities, in Hebrew,-which is be lieved by some to have been the first language of mankind. The whole collection, including the Pentateuch, was doubtless finally written out in Hebrew, by Ezra, from the notes, memoranda, and other materials in his possession.

The books of the New Testament were written originally in Greek-with the single exception, perhaps, of the Gospel of Matthew, which is supposed, by some emnent scholars, to have been written in Hebrew, or Hcbrew-Syriac, a mixed language, which might, perhaps, be as properly called a provincialism as a regular dialect.

The language of the people in Judea when Christ was upon the earth, was a corrupted Hebrew. This was the language spoken by Jesus and his immediate disciples. Therefore, to make use of "thee," or "thou," as the singular pronoun, in the second person, and "yea" and "nay," as the affirmative and negative rejoinders to a question, according to the custom of the Shakers and others, (however much it may be in conformity with our common scriptural version) is no more Apostolical or Christ-like, than to say ye or you, yes or no: though the first two examples may be more radically correct, if tried by the grammatical laws of the English tongue. The subject of the exact dates at which many of the

separate books in the Bible were written, is a matter involved in much doubtfulness, even to the most erudite scholars and so it must remain :-for in ancient time records were often kept in a very imperfect manner, as well as being afterwards destroyed, either purposely, or by some accident; or by the wasting influence of time, which rolls its wave over each record of human affairs, gradually and by stealth, but none the less surely, obliterating its transcripts; which, unless watched over, engraven deep, or perpetuated by some monument, are like letters, traced with the finger, in the sands of the sca-shore.

Such facts as shall seem to me well authenticated, in regard to dates, will be presented, in chronological order, in succeeding lectures.

Pertinent at this stage of the present discourse, will be a rapidly-drawn sketch of the history of the various materials upon which the different portions of the Bible have from time to time been written. And I may, perhaps, properly embrace, within the scope of this division of my remarks, a few items concerning the invention of record-substances in general, together with the improvements that have been made in regard to them, at different periods.

As far back in the recesses of the Past as the light of the historian's lamp enables us to see, the substance first selected by man on which to inscribe his thoughts, was stone. On two tables, or more properly tablets, of this

material, were engraven originally the Ten Commandments. The substance next chosen for memorandumpurposes, was wood. This was sometimes covered with wax, in which letters or figures were stamped. Contemporary with the use of this article, plates of lead, pieces of ivory, and other materials were resorted to ;— after which the leaves and bark of trees were employed, as mentioned in my last lecture. In Eastern countries, the broad leaves of the Palm, and other trees of Oriental growth, are still made use of. Some writers entertain the opinion that portions of some of the first books of the Old Testament were written originally on leaves. At a later period, the papyrus-a species of rush or flag, which grew on the banks of the river Nile-came into quite general use. It was, by an ingenious process of that time, wrought into a coarse kind of paper-the word "paper" being derived from papyrus, the name of the plant. Following this discovery, a still greater improvement was made in the preparation of parchment from the skins of sheep and other animals. It is probably known to many of you, that even now, every law enacted by our Legislature, after having passed to be engrossed, as it is technically called, is copied upon parchment. It is said there is still in preservation, in England, a copy of the Pentateuch written in the Hebrew language, on a parchment composed of forty-seven skins.

The phrases "opening" and "shutting," as used in the Bible, and applied to a book, signify the unrolling and rolling together of a parchment.