conscious of moments, in which something appears and stirs in the inmost recesses of our being, manifesting itself to be of a far higher source than ourselves. Who is not acquainted with the noble passage in the letters of Plato, preserved by Origen, c. Celsum, lib. vi., c. 3? The prime good is in nowise to be described in words, but arises within us from much intercourse, and as if starting suddenly from fire.' "The devout man does not only believe, but feels, there is a Deity. He has actual sensations of him."+ Thus Dr. Owen, “The soul knows God's voice when he speaks: there is something too great in it to be the effect of a created power. When the Lord Jesus Christ at one word stilled the raging of the sea and wind, all that were with him knew there was divine power at hand; and when the Holy Ghost by one word stills the tumults and storms that are raised in the soul, giving it an immediate calm and security, it knows his divine power, and rejoices in his presence."‡ This witness is more satisfactory than the evidence of sense. The witness enjoyed by ancient saints was that of the Holy Ghost, and not of circumstances, however imposing in their character. These were sometimes the vehicle of communication, but nothing more. Evidence of our adoption into God's family, if given exclusively to our senses, would not be so satisfactory as some imagine. Suppose it given by an audible voice; by some appearance to the eye; or in any similar manner; would this be conclusive? Would not the impositions to which our senses are subject be remembered? Would not the possibility of physical disorder be feared? And should we not first have to gain satisfactory evidence of the reality of the circumstance before we could possess ourselves of comfort? Or, if a Prophet, or a Christian Minister, were to address himself to the penitent, as Nathan did unto David, and assure him, "The Lord hath put away thy sin, thou shalt not die;" (2 Sam. xii. 13;) still, there would be the doubt whether the agent were correctly informed, or came with due authority; and with great propriety might the inquiry arise, "If God has vouchsafed so great a blessing, could he not have revealed it to myself as easily as to another?" Nor was David satisfied with the declaration of Nathan. He considered, that only part of the punishment was remitted, that is, death: for, in his penitential Psalms, he expresses anguish for sin, and for the sin in question; he deeply laments and confesses it, with bitterness of soul and with many tears; and still looked that God would "restore unto him the joy of his salvation." Dreams are of less value they are of a "doubtful, disputable nature, and may or may not be from God, and are, therefore, not simply to be relied on."§ Of this the slightest acquaintance with the manifold causes of dreaming, and with its connexion with the varied states of the nervous system and the imagination, will convince us. If dreams occur, in some cases, still no satisfactory evidence of salvation can be conveyed by, or ought *Tholuck on Romans. + Addison. Spectator. Communion with God. § Wesley's Works. Vol. ii., p. 100. Works. Ed. 1826. Vol. x., p. 297. to be concluded from, the dream itself, but only from the testimony of God's Spirit, which in its own demonstration is ascertained as distinct from all possible accompanying circumstances whatever. The proneness of human nature to confound spiritual with sensible effects, and to supersede the former by the latter, should admonish us not to place any dependence on dreams, however vivid and powerful the impressions which they produce may be; but rather to look for, and not to rest without, the direct witness of the Holy Ghost in our hearts; of which no dream is a part, nor a necessary or usual accompaniment. Nor would evidence based upon the deductions of reason yield the satisfaction which arises from this direct testimony. Rational demonstration has no higher authority than that of the mind itself, which, in its professed submission to any principles of inquiry, constitutes itself, in reality, the judge of their truth or fitness, and of all consequent conclusions; and makes its perceptions the supreme tribunal and ultimate court of appeal. Now this, when compared with the authoritative testimony of God, sinks, in its greatest perfection, into insignificance. But the adoption of the believer by Almighty God is a spiritual transaction, of which reason itself is not able to determine; and the existence of which "can only be known by God's supernatural testimony of it upon earth.”* "It is a matter of such solemn importance to every Christian soul, that God in his mercy has been pleased not to leave it to conjecture, assumption, or inductive reasoning; but attests it by his own Spirit in the soul of the person whom he adopts through Christ Jesus. It is the grand and most observable case in which the intercourse is kept up between heaven and earth; and the genuine believer in Christ Jesus is not left to the quibbles or casuistry of polemic divines or critics, but receives the thing, and the testimony of it, immediately from God himself. And were not the testimony of the state thus given, no man could possibly have any assurance of his salvation, which would beget confidence and love. to any man his acceptance with God be hypothetical, then his confidence must be so too. His love to God must be hypothetical, his gratitude hypothetical, and his obedience also. If God had forgiven me my sins, then I should love him, and I should be grateful, and I should testify my gratitude by obedience. But who does not see that these must necessarily depend on the IF in the first case? All this uncertainty, and the perplexities necessarily resulting from it, God has precluded by sending the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, by which we cry, Abba, Father: and thus our adoption into the heavenly family is testified and ascertained to us in the only way in which it can possibly be done, by the direct influence of the Spirit of God. Remove this from Christianity, and it is a dead letter."+ Flavel, in his "Fourth Sacramental Meditation,"‡ observes, "None but the Spirit of God can clear and confirm our title to Christ; for he only searcheth the deep things of God, (1 Cor. ii. 10,) and it is his office, (Rom. * Dr. A. Clarke. If + Dr. A. Clarke. Comment. Rom. viii. 15, 16, Works. Fol. 1701. Vol. ii., p. 1038. viii. 16,) to witness with our spirits. This seal or witness of the Spirit must needs be true and certain, because omniscience and truth are his essential properties. He is omniscient, (1 Cor. ii. 10,) and therefore cannot be deceived himself. He is the Spirit of truth, (John xiv. 17,) and therefore cannot deceive us; so that his testimony is more infallible and satisfactory than a voice from heaven. (2 Peter i. 19.) If an angel should appear, and tell us, Christ had said to him, 'Go and tell such a man that I love him, that I shed my blood for him, and will save him,' it could never give that repose and satisfaction to the mind as the internal witness or seal of the Spirit doth; for that may be a delusion, but this cannot. The witness of our own heart may amount to a strong probability, but the witness of the Spirit is demonstration." The direct communication of the Holy Spirit's witness is not, then, the result of arbitrary arrangement, but arises out of the nature of things; the character and situation of the parties; and affords delightful proof of the wisdom and goodness of God. (To be continued.) MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE MANNER IN WHICH OUR LORD REFERRED TO HIS OWN DIGNITY, AND HIS APPROACHING SUFFERINGS, IN SOME OF HIS LAST PUBLIC DISCOURSES. ONE of the most interesting periods of our Lord's ministry was that which intervened between his coming to Jerusalem, in fulfilment of the prophecy of Zechariah, and his violent and ignominious death. Brief as this period was, for it comprehended only three or four days, we have a copious record of the sayings which, during this time, fell from the Redeemer's lips; and these sayings deserve the serious and earnest attention of every human mind. It is scarcely necessary to remark, that there was no attempt on the part of our Lord to establish a civil dominion. He came to Jerusalem as the Prince of peace, and the bearer of salvation; and going up to the temple, he reproved and dismissed those who profaned that sacred place, and repeated there his miracles of pity and love. "And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them." Thus, to alleviate and remove the miseries of mankind, while he evinced his power over universal nature, was consistent with every former development of his character; but there was nothing in his whole demeanour or conduct which indicated a wish to place himself on an earthly throne. The salvation which he proclaimed was of a spiritual nature; it had respect to man's relation to God, as a subject of his moral government, and it embraced the two great blessings of forgiveness and inward purity. Our Lord had sought, from the very first, to correct the erroneous views which were generally entertained among the Jews, relative to "the kingdom of God," to be established in the latter days. He had affirmed that this kingdom "cometh not with observa tion;" that there is no external pomp accompanying its introduction and diffusion; no putting-forth of secular power or influence, to establish and extend it; but that it is "within us;" a spiritual dominion, established in the hearts of individual men, and achieving its noblest triumphs in the inmost recesses of the human spirit. And all his conduct, and all his declarations, when he came to Jerusalem amidst the acclamations of the multitude, were in accordance with the great truth which he had thus habitually inculcated. In the teaching of our Lord, during the brief but memorable period to which we have referred, we find repeated references to the mysterious dignity of his own person. He did not shrink back from affirming that he was more than man; that he was indeed, in a peculiar and exclusive sense, the Son; and that, when the purposes of his redeeming work should be accomplished, and the moral history of this world should be brought to a close, he should be revealed in all the majesty of universal dominion. But he connected with these intimations the most distinct and emphatic references to his rejection by the Chief Priests and Elders of the Jews, and the violent and shameful death which he was about to undergo. The cross was ever present to his mind; and often did he allude to his approaching sufferings, even while he claimed a dignity which no mere man could justly call his own. In illustration of one branch of the statement now made, we may refer to the question which our Lord proposed to the assembled Pharisees. They and the Sadducees had endeavoured to entangle him with their sophistry; to perplex him in the exposition of the great doctrines which he taught; but they had signally failed; and every attempt of theirs had served only to elicit more fully the deep and far-seeing wisdom by which he was distinguished. At length our Lord proposed to them a question, designed not simply to perplex them, or to reveal to them how superficial was their own knowledge of the ancient Scriptures, but also to call their attention to the peculiar manner in which the Messiah was spoken of in the sacred writings. He first inquired, "What think ye of the Messiah? Whose son is he?" They immediately replied, "The son of David." And then our Lord asked them to place in connexion with this the fact, that David, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, speaks of the Messiah as his Lord; and to point out the harmony of these two truths: "He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies my footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?" (Matt. xxii. 43—45.) A train of thoughts was thus suggested to the minds of all around, who were disposed sincerely to inquire into the ancient revelation, which might have led them to just views of the Messiah's person, and have prepared them fully to acknowledge our Lord's claim, to be indeed the Son of God, though he appeared in all the lowliness of ordinary humanity, when that claim should be yet more powerfully attested by his resurrection from the dead. But there is another, and perhaps a still more striking, illustration of the statements we have advanced, afforded in a conversation of our Lord with the Chief Priests and Pharisees, which took place probably a few hours before that now adduced. They had come to him as he was teaching in the temple, and had demanded, "By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?" Our Lord, knowing that they were not humble and sincere inquirers after truth, did not give a direct answer to their question, but proposed to them another, relative to the mission of John, whether it was from heaven or of men. To this question they declined to reply; and our Lord said, in return, " Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things." But he did not thus close the conversation. He immediately addressed to them two parables; the latter of which embraced the most instructive allusions to his personal dignity, and his coming exaltation; while it referred also to his rejection by those who ought to have cared for the spiritual interests of the Jewish Church, and have built up its members in knowledge and holiness. "Hear," he said, "another parable. There was a certain householder which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a wine-press in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country. And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first; and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. When the Lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." (Matt. xxi. 33—44.) It is impossible to read this parable, without perceiving that its entire structure intimates the superior dignity of the Lord Jesus to every preceding Prophet. They were the servants of the Lord of the vineyard; but He was "the Son," sent last of all to the unfaithful husbandmen, and having special claims on their reverence and submission. It was the rejection of Him, which completed the measure of their iniquity, and brought down upon them the signal judgments of their offended Lord. Thus the parable itself implied the mysterious dignity of our Redeemer's person; while it set forth the contempt with which he should be treated by the rulers of the Jewish people, and the violent death to which their malice would consign him. But our Lord added to the parable a quotation from one of the prophetic psalms, adducing it as now about to receive its accomplishment in his own rejection and sufferings, and his consequent exaltation as the Mediator. It was a beautiful and expressive portion of the ancient Scriptures, which our Lord thus brought forward. "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?" This language was perhaps obscure to many of the ancient saints; but to us, who are guided to its true meaning, it brightens into a clear and illustrious prophecy of the Messiah's history. He was to be "the stone," on which his church, as a lovely and sacred edifice, should rest, and which, as "the head of the corner," should be its most conspicuous ornament, and |