No one would have the slightest hesitation in explaining these passages in other credible historians, by this physical view; and I know no rule in logic or common sense,――no religious doctrine or theological principle, which compels me to explain two precisely similar phenomena of this character, in two totally different ways, because one of them is found in a heathen history, and the other in a sacred and inspired record. The vehicle thus chosen was not unworthy of making the peculiar manifestation of the presence of God, and of the outpouring of his spirit;――nor was it an unprecedented mode of his display. The awful thunder which shook old Sinai, and the lightnings which dazzled the eyes of the amazed Israelites, were real thunder and lightning, nor will an honest and reverent interpretation of the sacred text allow us to pronounce them acoustical and optical delusions. If they were real thunder and lightning, they were electrical discharges, and cannot be conceived of in any other way. Why should we hesitate at the notion that He who “holds the winds in the hollow of his hand,” and “makes a way for the lightning of thunder,” should use these same awful instruments as the symbols of his presence, to strike awe into the hearts of men, making the physical the token of the moral power; and accomplishing the deep prophetic meaning of the solemn words of the Psalmist, “He walks upon the wings of the wind――he makes the winds his messengers――the lightnings his ministers.” For this is the just translation of Psalm civ. 4. See Lowth, Clarke, Whitby, Calmet, Thomson, &c. But Jaspis, Bloomfield, Stuart, &c., support the common version.