alone. In fact, the present phenomena of the universe do not enable us to form a certain judgment respecting things so entirely dependent on circumstances, which we have reason to suppose are materially altered.

My ground, however, for believing that darkness is one of the consequences of the fall, and a part of the curse, is chiefly that darkness appears to me to be a great and positive evil. There are some, indeed, who talk of the change from light to darkness as a grateful vicissitude. This may be poetical, and beside that, in a country where our habits lead to our being awake during so many hours of darkness, we have naturally many pleasant associations with the long evenings of winter. Others, who do not pretend to find pleasure in what all studiously avoid, suggest that darkness is useful, as defining the periods of rest and labour, and ask what mankind would do for sleep, if it were always broad daylight? This objection, however, comes rather absurdly from persons who spend half the day by candle-light in winter, and sleep through hours of sunshine in the nights of summer-in short, whose times of activity and repose do not in the least depend upon the prevalence of

light or darkness. The absurdity of such an argument would become still more obvious and glaring by applying it to those latitudes which have longer days and nights than our own; but it is altogether unnecessary, because, in the first place, I do not deny that it often pleases God to bring good out of evil, so that beneficial results do not prove the intrinsic goodness of their causes ; and secondly, it seems probable, that if man had not fallen, he would not have required the refreshment of sleep. On this latter point, it is perhaps impossible to speak with certainty; but when I reflect on the dangers and evils that arise from darkness, and on the facilities which it affords for crimes, emphatically called "works of darkness," I cannot but look upon it as a positive evil; and every candle that has been consumed since the creation, has borne its testimony to the truth of this opinion.

To this I may add, that darkness is in many parts of the Scripture spoken of as an evil; and it is especially declared, with respect to the New Jerusalem, that there shall be "no night there;" an expression which, whether we interpret it literally or figuratively, seems at

least to imply that the absence of darkness is a blessing.

The points which I have mentioned, may, I believe, be considered as including all that we should generally speak of, as the consequences of the fall of man. I have not particularly dwelt upon that, which is the most important of all, the corruption of man's nature, and the work of his redemption, which may be considered among the consequences of his fall, partly because some points connected with these subjects are considered in subsequent essays, and principally because, as I have already said, I am not writing either a system of divinity, or a book of practical devotion; but only offering brief and superficial notices of some points, which are not so frequently discussed by others; but which seem to me to be worthy of some, though perhaps inferior, consideration.

Common interpretation of Gen. vi. 1-4-ancient interpretation supported by, I. The title "Sons of God"-II. The judgment of the Jewish Church-III. The Fathers-IV. Pagan Mythology-V. Testimony of Scripture.

THE reader whose attention has never been drawn to the subject, would probably decide at once, that nothing can be more fanciful than the ancient opinion, now almost entirely given up, that the "Sons of God," mentioned Gen. vi. 4, were Angels. Many, perhaps, know of this opinion only from the writings of Mr. Thomas Moore (one of the writers who has thought fit to fictionize the truths of revelation), and many are not aware that it ever existed at all. Such persons, should this essay fall into their hands, I beg to assure, that it is not the love of paradox, or of main

taining an opinion not generally held, but a thorough conviction that truth has been abandoned, and error substituted, which leads to my offering these remarks on the subject; and I would request them first candidly to consider the current explanation of that passage, and then to weigh what may be said in favour of the old opinion.

One thing more I would premise-some reader may say (for I often hear such language, and never without pain and pity), "What does it matter to us which opinion is right? Of what use would it be to us to know when, and why, and how, the angels fell? Is it not a curious speculative question, and will not one opinion do quite as well as another?" Such persons I am not anxious to answer in detail; being persuaded in my own mind that it is an important duty to get rid of error, as much as we can, on all subjects, and especially of all error, which has fastened on the Word of God; and that he who attempts to explain any verse of the Bible, which has been misunderstood, or to illustrate any fact of revelation, which has been misconceived, is well and usefully employed. The objector would, perhaps, see the nature of his objection