[18] From a comparison of Matt. v. 23, 24 with Matt. xviii. 21, 22, we may learn a fine principle as to the way in which wrongs and injuries are to be settled between two brothers. The injurer is sent back from the altar, in order to have his matters set straight with the injured one; for there can be no communion with the Father so long as my brother "hath aught against me." But then, mark the beauteous way in which the injured one is taught to receive the injurer.--"'Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?' Jesus saith unto him, 'I say not unto thee, Until seven times; but, _Until seventy times seven_.'" Such is the divine mode of settling all questions between brethren. "Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye." (Col. iii. 13.) There is far more involved in the divine order prescribed in the trespass-offering than might at first sight appear. The claims which arise out of our human relations must not be disregarded; they must ever get their proper place in the heart. This is distinctly taught in the trespass-offering. When an Israelite had, by an act of trespass, deranged his relation with Jehovah, the order was, sacrifice and restitution: when he had, by an act of trespass, deranged his relation with his neighbor, the order was, restitution and sacrifice. Will any one undertake to say this is a distinction without a difference? Does the change of the order not convey its own appropriate, because divinely appointed, lesson? Unquestionably. Every point is pregnant with meaning, if we will but allow the Holy Ghost to convey that meaning to our hearts, and not seek to grasp it by the aid of our poor vain imaginings. Each offering conveys its own characteristic view of the Lord Jesus and His work, and each is presented in its own characteristic order; and, we may safely say, it is at once the business and the delight of the spiritual mind to apprehend both the one and the other. The very same character of mind which would seek to make nothing of the peculiar order of each offering, would also set aside the idea of a peculiar phase of Christ in each. It would deny the existence of any difference between the burnt-offering and the sin-offering, and between the sin-offering and the trespass-offering, and between any or all of these and the meat-offering or the peace-offering. Hence, it would follow that the first seven chapters of the book of Leviticus are all a vain repetition, each successive chapter going over the same thing. Who could cede aught so monstrous as this? What Christian mind could suffer such an insult to be offered to the sacred page? A German rationalist or neologian may put forth such vain and detestable notions, but those who have been divinely taught that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God," will be led to regard the various