e 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew for the LORD God had not e ch. 1. 12. Ps. 104. 14. caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground, f Job 38. 26, 27, 28. g ch. 3. 23. selves, however, afford no warrant for Yehovah, is kept up throughout this and the following chapter. The original 777 Jehovah implies the eternal self-existence of the Most High, and his being the cause of all other existence. It is equivalent to the august name, Ex. 3. 14, I AM THAT I AM. The true import of the word is supposed to be declared, Rev. 1. 8, which is, and which was, and which is to come,' i. e. the everlasting; in accordance with which, Rab. Bechai, an ancient Jewish writer, says, "These three times, past, present, and to come, are comprehended in this proper name, as is known to all.' Why a change in the appellation occurs here it is not easy to say. By some it is considered as strong evidence that this part of the narrative is from another hand than that of Moses. But by comparing the passage with Ex. 6. 3, 'And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them,' it may perhaps be safely main-ing it into another language was first tained, that the title here is not used in allusion to his power like 'Elohim,' but to his actually performing, finishing, or consummating his works. 'As we find him known by his name Jehovah when he appeared to perform what he had promised, so now we have him known by that name when he had perfected what he had begun.' Henry. The Jews attach so much sanctity to this name, that in reading the Hebrew Scriptures, they never, with the single exception of Num. 6. 23, 27, pronounce it, but always substitute 177 Adonai, another title which is frequently, but not exclusively, applied to the Deity, and which is also in our version rendered Lord, The Scriptures them set by the Greek version of the Seventy. And this usage the writers of the New Testament have seen fit to adopt, always employing as its equivalent Kupios kurios, Lord, and thus establishing a precedent which all modern translators have felt safe in following. 5. And every plant of the field before it was in the earth. That is, these are the generations, or this is the history, of the production of the plants and herbs, prior to the ordinary mode of propagation from the seed. They were produced in their full perfection, by a simple act of omnipotence, without going through the present established process of germination from a seed, or being at all indeoted to the influence of rain, or 6 But there went up a mist | man of the dust of the ground, from the earth, and watered the and i breathed into his nostrils whole face of the ground. the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 7 And the LORD God formed of human tillage. The Hebrew particle ( terem) rendered 'before' may mean 'not yet,' viz. ' and every plant of the field was not yet in the earth, and every herb of the field had not yet sprung up,' which substantially agrees with the former; the design of the writer being to enhance the wonder of such a production in the absence of all the natural causes which now contribute to it. ་ eminently distinguished for its fidelity to the original. 7. Formed man of the dust of the ground. Heb. 7D DINI formed man dust of the ground; i. e. made him to be of the same material as the dust of the ground, so that when he died it might be said that he returned or was resolved into dust. Strictly considered the creation of a living being from a preexisting inert substance can scarcely be distinguished from a creation out of nothing. The same degree of power is requisite in the one case as in the other.- -¶ Breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Heb. breath of lives; intimating, as some have supposed, that man possesses the vegetative life of plants, the sensitive life of animals, and that higher rational life which distinguishes humanity. Still it is not certain that this is the import of the plural in this word, nor is it possible to say with confidence what is. As to the action here attributed to the Creator, we are not to suppose that any such process was actual 6. But there went up a mist. As this verse reads in our translation it is somewhat singularly introduced; at least, it is not easy to perceive its connection with the context, nor the precise design with which it is here inserted. Probably a more correct rendering of the words is, Neither had there gone up a mist,' &c. The Heb. copulative and is in repeated instances in the scriptures to be rendered nor when the preceding clause or sentence is negative. Thus, Ex. 20. 4, 'Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image nor (Heb. and) any likeness.' Ps. 44. 19, 'Our heart has not turned back from thee, nor (Heb. and) our steps de-ly performed by him as breathing into clined from thy paths.' Is. 42. 8, 'My glory will I not give to another, nor (Heb. and) my praise to graven images.' The design is still to intimate that the process of vegetation, which usually requires the genial aid of rain or dew, was now miraculously effected without either. So far indeed from there having been a rain, not even a mist had arisen to which the result could be attributed, This rendering occurs in the Arab, version of Saadias and is adopted in that of Junius and Tremellius, which is, for the most part, the nostrils of the inanimate clay which he had moulded into the human form. This is evidently spoken after the manner of men; and we are merely to understand by it a special act of omnipotence imparting the power of breathing or respiration to the animal fabric that he had formed, in consequence of which it became quickened and converted to a 'living soul,' that is, a living and sentient creature. This act is indicated by the phrase 'breathed into his nostrils,' because the function of respiration is chiefly visible in this part of 8 ed m he put the And the LORD God plant- Eden; and there a garden m ch. 13. 10. Isa. 51.3. 3. n ch. 3. 24. eastward in Ez. 28. 13. Joel 2. o ch. 4. 16. 2 Kings 19. 12. Ez. 27. 23. p v. 15. word for 'garden,' which properly sig. nifies an enclosure, from a root deno and good that the earth can produce.' The term, at length by a natural process came to be applied to any peculiarly fertile or delightful region, and was intro the human frame. The subject is still further considered in the next note. - Became a living soul. Heb. "ting protection, is rendered in the Sept. became to a living soul; an by Ilapadeloos a paradise, a term howidiom of the original properly rendered ever not of Greek or Hebrew, but in our version. The phrase 'living of Arabic or Persian origin, used to desoul' is in the foregoing narrative re- note a park, pleasure-garden, or woodpeatedly applied to the inferior orders land enclosure, surrounded by a wall, of animals which are not considered to watered by running streams, and be possessed of a 'soul' in the sense in abounding with fruit and flower trees, which that term, is applied to man. It and other objects fitted to regale the would seem to mean the same, there- senses. Thus Xenoph. Econom. IV. fore, when spoken of man that it does 13, 'The king of Persia takes particuwhen spoken of beasts, viz. an anima- lar care, wherever he is, to have garted being, a creature possessed of life dens or enclosures, which are called and sensation, and capable of perform-Paradises, full of every thing beautiful ing all the physical functions by which animals are distinguished, as eating, drinking, walking, &c. As to the intellectual faculties which raise man so far above the tribes of the brute crea-duced into the later Hebrew in the form tion, we find no term that expressly designates them, in any part of the sacred narrative. The fact of his being possessed of them seems rather to be implied in what is said of his being made in the image of God, and in the greater degree of importance attached to the circumstances of his creation. Indeed it may be remarked that the Scriptures generally afford much less explicit evidence of the existence of a sentient immaterial principle in man, capable of living and acting separate from the body, than is usually supposed. Yet favoured as the idea is by so many analogies of nature and by such strong inductions of reason, it would be presumptuous to deny the existence of such a principle, even though the Scriptures had been entirely silent on the subject. of Pardes, in which it occurs Neh. 2. 8, rendered 'forest,' and Eccl. 2. 5. Cant. 4. 3, rendered 'orchard.' From its denoting a place abounding with enchanting scenery, and one which in the case of our first parents was the abode of innocence and bliss, it became in process of time a metaphorical appellation of heaven, the seat of the blessed, 1 Cor. 12, 4. Luke, 23. 43. The import of the Heb. 17 Eden is pleasure, intimating the superior beauty of the region known by that name. As to the true site of this primitive abode of man, though it has been the subject of almost endless discussion among the learned, it is still involved in great obscurity, and an approximation to truth is perhaps all that is to be expected as the result of the most care8 The Lord God planted a garden. ful inquiry. It may, we think, be safeRather had planted,' i. e. at some timely assumed that the name Eden desigprevious. The place of residence was nates a place or region which was so fitted up before the intended occupant denominated in the time of Moses, rawas introduced into it. The original ther than at the time of its occupation 9 And out of the ground made | life also in the midst of the garthe LORD God to grow every den, and the tree of knowledge tree that is pleasant to the sight, of good and evil. and good for food; the tree of q Ezek. 31. 8. r ch. 3. 22. Prov. 3. 18. & 11. 30. Rev. 2. 7. & 22. 2, 14. s ver. 17. region sufficiently large to have embraced them all. 9. Every tree that was pleasant to the sight. The garden of Eden, which had been planted by the hand of God himself for the residence of the happy beings he had created, was, as its name imports, the centre of every terrestrial pleasure. The bounty of the Creator had stored it with every plant and flow by its first happy tenants; for why should it then have been distinguished by a name at all? Geographical distinctions naturally and necessarily arise from the settlement of the globe by its inhabitants, but cannot well be conceived as existing prior to such periods, unless the name were given by God himself, for which we can see no sufficient reason. The same remark may be made of the rivers and the other pla-er and tree, that was pleasant to the ces mentioned in this connection. They are doubtless to be considered as postdiluvian and not as ante-diluvian names. The site of Eden therefore is to be determined by determining, as far as possible, the respective positions of the adjacent streams and regions, an attempt at which is made in a subsequent note. eye, grateful to the smell, or adapted to the sustenance of life. In addition to this, ample and refreshing streams of water, so necessary to the very existence of an oriental garden, diffused a perpetual verdure over its whole extent, and imparted to every plant, a beauty, vigour, and fertility, perhaps unknown in any other district of the globe. Among these goodly productions of the garden, two of remarkable character and use are distinctly specified. The first was the tree of life,' an appellation denoting, in addition to its spiritual or moral import, a living tree, just as 'oath of bond,' is equivalent to 'binding oath;' ' words of grace,' to 'gracious words;' vessel of choice,' to 'chosen vessel;' &c. It was probably a tree or class of trees, of the evergreen species, contin ་ -¶ Eastward in Eden. Heb. 7p 17 in Eden from, or at, the east, or eastward. Eden, we suppose, was a region of very considerable extent, while the garden was a smaller tract embraced within its limits. The object of the sacred writer here appears to be to indicate the position of the garden, not only in reference to the country in which Moses dwelt when the history was written, but also in reference to the territory of Eden itself; it was situated in the easterly part of that highly fa-ually flourishing and fruitful, from its vored land. That this was a widely possessing an undecaying vitality. To extended region is to be inferred not on- this tree there is evident allusion in the ly from what is said of the several riv- description of the heavenly paradise, ers by which it was bounded or travers-Rev. 22. 2, in which was the 'tree of ed, but from the fact that several places of the name of Eden, yet remote from each other, lay a traditional claim to having been the primeval seat of the human race. Probably the correct mode of adjusting these claims is to suppose that the original Eden was a life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month.' In both cases it may be presumed that the trees were named, in part at least, from their common inherent property of perennial fruit-bearing. But this by no means exhausts the full import of the simple intelligence, but also of a practical feeling or experimental sense of the thing known. Thus Ps. 101. 4, 'I will not know a wicked person;' i. e. I will not have complacency in him. Mat. 7. 23, Then will I profess unto them, I never knew you;' i. e. I never approved of you. Rom. 7. 7, 'I had not known sin but by the law;' i. e. had not experimentally known it.-In the above remarks we have given what we conceive to be, on the whole, the most correct interpretation of the phrase, 'tree of knowledge of good and evil.♪ At the same time it is, perhaps, but just to advert to an objection urged against this sense of the words by the learned Vitringa, who seldom advances an opinion that is not entitled to great re appellation. The tree of life in Eden, undoubtedly conveyed to Adam, by the express appointment of the Creator, a symbolical meaning, serving as a visible sign or pledge of the continuance to him of a blessed natural life, as long as he should continue obedient. Regarded in this light he undoubtedly often ate of the fruit of the tree before his fall, not perhaps as a means of sustaining life, or of making him immortal, but sacramentally, as Christians now eat of the Lord's supper, to confirm their faith in the divine promises, and as a symbol of spiritual blessings imparted to the soul.- - In the midst of the garden. Heb. 1770. The phrase in the midst,' 'as used by the sacred writers, often signifies merely within certain limits, without implying an exact-spect. He argues, that 'to know good ly central position. Thus Gen. 41. 48, Heb. 'In the midst of the same (city ;)' Eng. in the same. Job, 2. 8, (Heb.) 'He sat down in the midst of the ashes; Eng. among the ashes. Luke, 8. 7, (Gr.) 'Fell in the midst of thorns;' Eng. among thorns. In like manner all that is implied here probably is, that the tree of life grew within the precincts of the garden, while it was not found without. This is confirmed by Gen 3. 22, 23, where the reason given for the man's being driven out of the garden is, 'lest he should put forth his hand and take of the tree of life; from which the înference is natural, that the tree did not grow without the garden. Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Gr. 'The tree of knowing that which may be known of good and evil.' Chal. 'The tree of whose fruit they that eat shall know the difference between good and evil.' These paraphrases give the sense of the expression. The tree was so called because, being appointed as a test of obedience, Adam by eating of its fruit, would acquire the knowledge of good by losing it, and of evil - by experiencing it. The term knowledge in the idiom of the Scriptures usually carries with it the idea not only of and evil,' in the language of Scripture, is to understand the nature of good and evil, of right and wrong, not to experience it; and that the tree therefore could not have been so named proleptically from the event. For although by the fall the original pair had indeed full experience of sin and misery, yet how could it be said that they thereby acquired the knowledge of good? If it be answered 'by contrast,' the experi ence of evil having taught them the value of those blessings which they had lost, this implies that they were previously unacquainted with good; and not only so, but that they experienced good by an event from which they only derived evil. This is indeed a specious objection, and has led some commentators to understand by the appellation a tree which was the test of good and evil; a tree by which our first parents would be tried whether they would be good or bad, or by which it would appear whether they would obey or disobey the commands of their Creator. From the whole tenor of the history it would appear, it is said, that the tree of knowledge was appointed to be the test of Adam's fidelity to his Creator, and consequently was so called from |