possible to their united zeal." But to enable men who have such convictions to impart them effectually and continuously to those who have not, you want organization, viz., missionary funds, meetings for conference and prayer, funds to pay expenses attending these meetings, for printing and distributing papers, lectures and tracts. Therefore I say that some organization is wanted even to commence the revival of religious faith and zeal. Organization will not produce life à priori. But as soon as two or three are gathered together in the name of Christnay, as soon as but one man aims at imparting the faith and zeal which animate himself-organization is needed; and the more perfect that organization, the more efficiently such persons will be able to bring their own inner life to influence the life of their brethren.

And

There may be quite enough organization in our denomination to give the first new impulse to our faith and works, if it is rightly used. if a more vigorous zeal and a more living faith is gradually developed, all outward arrangements will grow pari passu. Only let us do the utmost we can with our present means, and if faithful in a few things, we shall be entrusted with more.

Wandsworth, Dec. 16, 1856.

HENRY SOLLY.

SIR,

ISAIAH vii. 14.

THAT by the child promised, Is. vii. 14, and the son whose birth is announced, Is. ix. 6, we are to understand the same individual, seems to be at least highly probable. The prediction was intended as a sign to Ahaz of the defeat and destruction of his enemies. The subject of it must have been destined to a position which would give that king opportunities of observing the circumstances of his birth and the manner of his life, until he became old enough to choose the good and to refuse the evil; and the son announced was evidently of the royal household. The high titles which were to be given to him, and the career which was marked out for him, indicate that he belonged to a family of the highest distinction, and that his birth was an event of public and national importance. Were there two persons of that age whose histories favour the opinion that they were here, and both, separately predicted? I think not. The records of the period only mention one man who could bear the titles foretold and answer the expectations raised. That man was Hezekiah. He was the child of Ahaz, born in his house and living under his eye. He, very likely, was the son of the virgin, who seems to have been alluded to, by that definite phrase, as a person of eminence. In his early youth, even before he could know to refuse the evil and to choose the good, while he was eating butter and honey,— living delicately, the land which Ahaz abhorred was forsaken of both her kings, as his father had the best opportunity of knowing; and subsequently, on his, perhaps, early accession to the throne, his character, ability and successes, made him more worthy, than any other person of the time, of the foretold honours and titles; while in the destruction of Sennacherib's army, the more remarkable prediction connected with

the promise of the child of the virgin, and the announcement of the son given to us," was most wonderfully fulfilled.

66

Your correspondent, a late Bengal Civilian, tells us that he at one time agreed with Dr. Pye Smith, that by the virgin or young woman referred to, Is. vii. 14, was meant the Queen of Ahaz; but that from a comparison of 2 Kings xvi. 2 with xviii. 12, according to which Hezekiah must have been eight or nine years old when the prophecy was delivered, he now concludes that he was mistaken in that opinion. But was the age of Hezekiah sufficient evidence of that mistake? Was the prince really so old at the time? We have, indeed, evidence in 2 Kings xvi. 2, that Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and that he reigned sixteen years; consequently he died at the age of thirty-six. We are also told, 2 Kings xviii. 2, that Hezekiah was twenty-five years old when he began to reign. If so, he was born at least nine years before the commencement of his father's reign, and therefore could not be the child whose birth was foretold in the early part of that reign. But, if so, it is evident from a comparison of those dates, that he was born when his father, who seems to have had older children than he, could not be more than ten or eleven,—a circumstance which, from its very great improbability, raises the suspicion that there may be some mistake in the chronology. If there be an error there, it is most likely in the age of Ahaz, because Jotham, the father of Ahaz, could not be more than twenty-one when that prince was born. We have, then, to choose between the admission of a mistake, which might easily be made, by a transcriber or otherwise, as to the age of Hezekiah at the commencement of his reign, and the very unlikely circumstance of Ahaz having a son, who, as I have said before, was most likely not his oldest child, born at so early a period of his own life. I think it likely that Hezekiah was not the first child of Ahaz, because early in his reign that wicked king offered his children for sacrifices to idols (2 Chron. xxviii. 2), a fate from which probably Hezekiah escaped by being then unborn; and because, also early in his reign, a son of his, who must then have been old enough to be of some importance in the state, was killed by Zechri, "a mighty man of Ephraim."

A mistake in the age of Hezekiah might easily be made by using the characters which represent two tens and five instead of those which represent one ten and five, and as such an error would make him appear twenty-five when he was only fifteen, we shall, by the admission of it, not only be freed from the improbability of his being born when his father was but in his eleventh year, but we shall have to place his birth at the exact period when, if he were the subject of the prophecy, he might be expected to appear; and we should find in him the fulfilment of both the predictions of Isaiah, for which we must otherwise look amongst the records of that age in vain; and we shall be left in possession of the opinion that by the virgin or young woman mentioned in Is. vii. 14, we are to understand the Queen of Ahaz.

December 9, 1856.

J. N.

INTELLIGENCE.

the promise of the child of the virgin, and the announcement of the "son given to us," was most wonderfully fulfilled.

Your correspondent, a late Bengal Civilian, tells us that he at one time agreed with Dr. Pye Smith, that by the virgin or young woman referred to, Is. vii. 14, was meant the Queen of Ahaz; but that from a comparison of 2 Kings xvi. 2 with xviii. 12, according to which Hezekiah must have been eight or nine years old when the prophecy was delivered, he now concludes that he was mistaken in that opinion. But was the age of Hezekiah sufficient evidence of that mistake? Was the prince really so old at the time? We have, indeed, evidence in 2 Kings xvi. 2, that Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and that he reigned sixteen years; consequently he died at the age of thirty-six. We are also told, 2 Kings xviii. 2, that Hezekiah was twenty-five years old when he began to reign. If so, he was born at least nine years before the commencement of his father's reign, and therefore could not be the child whose birth was foretold in the early part of that reign. But, if so, it is evident from a comparison of those dates, that he was born when his father, who seems to have had older children than he, could not be more than ten or eleven,-a circumstance which, from its very great improbability, raises the suspicion that there may be some mistake in the chronology. If there be an error there, it is most likely in the age of Ahaz, because Jotham, the father of Ahaz. could not be more than twenty-one when that prince was born. W have, then, to choose between the admission of a mistake, which migh easily be made, by a transcriber or otherwise, as to the age of Hezekial at the commencement of his reign, and the very unlikely circumstance of Ahaz having a son, who, as I have said before, was most likely no his oldest child, born at so early a period of his own life. I think 1 likely that Hezekiah was not the first child of Ahaz, because early i his reign that wicked king offered his children for sacrifices to ido! (2 Chron. xxviii. 2), a fate from which probably Hezekiah escaped b being then unborn; and because, also early in his reign, a son of hi who must then have been old enough to be of some importance in ti. state, was killed by Zechri, "a mighty man of Ephraim."

A mistake in the age of Hezekiah might easily be made by using th characters which represent two tens and five instead of those whic represent one ten and five, and as such an error would make him appe.. twenty-five when he was only fifteen, we shall, by the admission of i not only be freed from the improbability of his being born when hi father was but in his eleventh year, but we shall have to place his birt at the exact period when, if he were the subject of the prophecy, h might be expected to appear; and we should find in him the fulfilmer of both the predictions of Isaiah, for which we must otherwise loo amongst the records of that age in vain; and we shall be left in posses sion of the opinion that by the virgin or young woman mentioned in Is. vii. 14, we are to understand the Queen of Ahaz.