by no means conveys a correct idea of the original word. The Greek word――ζῶον――means properly _a living thing_; and it is thus indeed applied to animals, or to the living creation, but the notion of their being _living things_, or _living creatures_, should be retained in the translation. Professor Stuart renders it, “living creatures.” Isaiah (vi.), in his vision of Jehovah, {113} saw two seraphim; Ezekiel, whom John more nearly resembles in his description, saw four “living creatures”――חַיּוֹת (ch. i. 5)――that is, living, animated, moving beings. The words “living beings” would better convey the idea than any other which could be employed. They are evidently, like those which Ezekiel saw, symbolical beings; but the nature and purpose of the symbol is not perfectly apparent. The “four and twenty elders” are evidently human beings, and are representatives, as above explained, of the church. In ch. v. 11, _angels_ are themselves introduced as taking an important part in the worship of heaven: and these living beings, therefore, cannot be designed to represent either angels or men. In Ezekiel they are either designed as poetic representations of the majesty of God, or of his providential government, showing what _sustains_ his throne; symbols denoting intelligence, vigilance, the rapidity and directness with which the divine commands are executed, and the energy and firmness with which the government of God is administered. The nature of the case, and the similarity to the representation in Ezekiel, would lead us to suppose that the same idea is to be found substantially in John; and there would be no difficulty in such an interpretation were it not that these “living creatures” are apparently represented in ch. v. 8, 9, as uniting with the redeemed from the earth in such a manner as to imply that they were themselves redeemed. But perhaps the language in ch. v. 9, “And _they_ sung a new song,” &c., though apparently connected with the “four beasts” in ver. 8, is not designed to be so connected. John may intend there merely to advert to the fact that a new song was sung, without meaning to say that the “four living beings” _united_ in that song. For, if he designed merely to say that the “four living beings” and the “four and twenty elders” fell down to worship, and then that a song was heard, though in fact sung only by the four and twenty elders, he might have employed the language which he actually has done. If this interpretation be admitted, then the most natural explanation to be given of the “four living beings” is to suppose that they are symbolical beings designed to furnish some representation of the government of God――to illustrate, as it were, that on which the divine government _rests_, or which constitutes its support――to wit, power, intelligence, vigilance, energy. This is apparent, (a) because it was not unusual for the thrones of monarchs to be supported by carved animals of various forms, which were designed