The time when the confusion of tongues took place, renders it highly probable that the scheme which it was intended to subvert was of Nimrod's forming, or that he had a principal concern in it. It must have been a little before the division of the earth among the sons of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, after their TONGUES in their countries, and in their nations; being that which rendered such division necessary. Now this was about the time of the birth of Peleg, who was named from that event: and this, by reckoning the genealogies mentioned in Chap. xi. 10-16, will appear to have been about a hundred years after the flood. At this time, Nimrod, who was the grandson of Ham, must have been alive and in his prime. And as he was the first person who aspired to dominion over his brethren, and as it is expressly said of him, that the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, nothing is more natural than to suppose that he was the leader in this famous enterprise, and that the whole was a scheme of his, by which to make himself master of the world.

It was also natural for an ambitious people, headed by an ambitious leader, to set up for universal monarchy. Such has been the object of almost all the great nations and conquerors of the earth in later periods. Babylon, though checked for the present, by this divine interference, yet afterwards resumed the pursuit of her favourite object; and in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, seemed almost to have gained it. The style used by that monarch in his proclamations, comported with the spirit of this idea : To you it is commanded, O people, nations, and tongues! Now if such has been the ambition of all Nimrod's successors, in every

it is nothing surprising that it should have struck the mind of Nimrod himself, and his adherents. They would also have a sort of claim to which their successors could not pretend; namely, that of being the first, or parent kingdom; and the weight which men are apt to attach to this claim, may be seen by the later pretensions of papal Rome, (another Babylon,) which, under the character of a mother church, headed by a pope, or pretended holy father, has subjected all Christendom to her dominion.

To this may be added, that the means used to counteract these builders, were exactly suited to defeat the above design; namely,

that of dividing and scattering them, by confounding their lan guage. And it is worthy of notice, that though several empires< have extended their territories over people of different långuages, yet language has been a very common boundary of nations ever since. There is scarcely a great nation in the world, but what has its own language. The dividing of languages was therefore, in effect, the dividing of nations; and so a bar to the whole world being ruled by one government. Thus a perpetual miracle was wrought, to be an antidote to a perpetual disease.

But why, it may be asked, should it be the will of God to prevent a universal monarchy; and to divide the inhabitants of the world into a number of independent nations; This question opens a wide field for investigation. Suffice it to say at present, such a state of things contains much mercy, both to the world and to the church.

With respect to the world, if the whole earth had continued under one government, that government would of course, considering what human nature is, have been exceedingly despotic and oppressive. We know that in every state of society, where power, or wealth, or commerce, is monopolized by an individual, or confined to a few whose interests may unite them to one another, there is the greatest possible scope for injustice and oppression ; and where there is the greatest scope for these evils, human nature being what it is, there they will most abound. Different nations and interests in the world serve as a balance one to the other. They are that to the world which a number of rival merchants, or lesser tradesmen, are to society; serving as a check upon each other's rapacity. Union, when cemented by good will to men, is exceedingly desirable: but when self-interest and ambition are at the bottom, it is exceedingly dangerous. Union, in such cases, is nothing better than a combination against the general good.

It might be thought, that if the whole world were under one government, a great number of wars might be prevented, which, as things now are, would be certain to take place. And it is true, that one stable government, to a certain extent, is on this account preferable to a great number of lesser ones, which are always at variance. But this principle, if carried beyond certain limits,

becomes inimical to human happiness.

So far as different nations

can really become one, and drop all local distinctions and interests, it is well but if the good of the country governed be lost sight of, and every thing be done to aggrandize the city, or country governing, it is otherwise. And where power is thus exercised, which it certainly would be in case of a universal monarchy, it would produce as many wars as now exist, with only this difference, that instead of their being carried on between independent nations, they would consist of the risings of different parts of the empire against the government, in a way of rebellion and by how much wars of this kind are accompanied with less mutual respect, less quarter given and taken, and consequently more cruelty than the other, by so much would the state of the world have been more miserable than it is at present.

The division of the world into independent nations has also been a great check on persecution, and so has operated in a way of mercy towards the church. If the whole world had been one despotic government, Israel, the people of God, must in all ages have been in the condition to which they were reduced from the times of the captivity as a punishment for their sins, a mere province of another power, which might have crushed them and hindered them, as was the case from the times of Cyrus to those of Darius. And since the coming of Christ, the only way in which he permits his followers to avoid the malice of the world which rages against them for his sake, is this: If they persecute you in one city, flee to another. Of this liberty millions have availed themselves, from the earliest to the latest periods of the Christian church but if the whole world had been under one government, and that government inimical to the gospel, there had been no place of refuge left upon earth for the faithful.

The necessary watch also that governments which have been the most disposed to persecute have been obliged to keep on each other, has filled their hands, so as to leave them but little time to think of religious people. Saul, when pursuing David, was withdrawn from his purpose by intelligence being brought him, that the Philistines had invaded the land: and, innumerable instances, the quarrels of bad men have been advantageous to the righteous.

The division of power serves likewise to check the spirit of persecution, not only as finding employment for persecutors to - watch their rivals, but as causing them to be watched and their conduct exposed. While the power of papal Rome extended over Christendom, persecution raged abundantly more than it has done since the Reformation, even in popish countries. Since that period, the popish powers, both ecclesiastical and civil, have felt themselves narrowly watched by protestants, and have been almost shamed out of their former cruelties. What has been done of late years has been principally confined to the secret recesses of the Inquisition. It is by communities as it is by individuals they are restrained from innumerable excesses by the consideration of being under the eye of each other. Thus it is, that liberty of conscience, being granted in one or two nations and becoming honourable, has insensibly made its way into the councils of many others.

:

From the whole, we may infer two things. (1.) The harmony of divine revelation with all that we know of fact. If any object to the probability of the foregoing account, and imagine that the various languages spoken in the world must have been of human contrivance, let them point us to a page in any history, ancient or modern, which gives an account of the first making of a language, dead. or living. If all that man can be proved to have done towards the formation of any language, be confined to changing, combining, improving, and reducing it to grammatical form, there is the greatest probability, independent of the authority of revelation, that languages themselves were originally the work of God, as was that of the first man and woman. (2.) The desirableness of the universal spread of Christ's kingdom. We may see, in the reasons which render a universal government among men incompatible with the liberty and safety of the world, abundant cause to pray for this, and for the union of all his subjects under him. Here there is no danger of tyranny or oppression, nor any need of those low motives of rivalship to induce him to seek the wellbeing of his subjects. A union with Christ and one another embraces the best interests of mankind.