makes no allowance for, the time, place, and circumstances under which they were written, and the state of things which existed in the localities to which they were addressed; but, independently of putting his own construction upon them, he quotes as freely and indiscriminately as if every part and parcel was strictly applicable to persons in every part of the world, and to all the varied states of individual minds, in every subsequent age. Yet, in the writings of Paul, who wrote "according to the wisdom given unto him," at that time, the apostle Peter discovered "some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, (not the epistolary writings) unto their own destruction." It would be well if this particular discrimination were not altogether overlooked in the present time: for it is too generally the case that religious controversialists appear to attach more weight and importance to the writings of the apostles in their epistles to particular churches, in a doctrinal point of view, than to the gospels which contain the words of Him who "spake as never man spake." Surely, without meaning any disrespect for the writings of the apostles, we may give the preference to the express words of the Lord himself, who spoke from his own interior wisdom, and uttered truths infallible and divine, and who could say (what the apostles could not, and did not say),—" The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." But should this be generally regarded, what would become of the false systems of religion which abound in the world? What would become of many doctrines which have become so fashionable and so popular, but which our Lord never taught even by implication? Men first construct a religious theory in the imagination, and then resort to the epistles, and sometimes pervert the truths of the gospels, to confirm it. From a cursory perusal of this work, a specimen may be seen of this mode of proceeding which fully bears out these remarks. The writer does not observe the modesty of which Lord Bacon speaks where he says," He may seem a disciple of Nicodemus who shall obstinately inquire, 'How can a man be born again when he is old?' But he can be esteemed no disciple of St. Paul who does not sometimes insert in his doctrine, I, not the Lord,' or, according to my judgment;' which is the style that generally suits with inferences. Lord Bacon does not appear to be a favourite writer with Mr. T.; yet he may probably bear with us in another quotation, in which he attaches great importance to the words uttered by the Lord himself. He says, -“The answers of our Saviour are not suited to many of the

* Mr. Thom quotes from Paul, and calls it "the subject matter of express divine declaration." Page 6.

questions proposed to him; but appear, in a manner, impertinent; for two reasons, 1st, Because, as he knew the thoughts of those who put the question; not from the words, as men know them; but immediately, and of himself, he answered to their THOUGHTS, and not to their words: and 2ndly, Because he spoke not to those alone who were present, but to us also now living, and to the men of every age and place where the gospel shall be preached." ("Novum Organum.")

66

The plan pursued in this work on the three grand exhibitions of man's enmity to God," is, a three-fold division of time, or three grand eras, extending from Adam until now. In each of these grand eras, an "experiment" (!) is stated to have been made by God upon the human race; (!) not for the purpose of reclaiming man, but to bring into open manifestation the enmity that is in him!! Thus, in the three eras, three grand experiments have been made by God upon the human race. What rational mind would conceive of such experiments being made by Infinite Wisdom, upon a being who is, according to Mr. Thom's theory, a mere passive subject, or machine! What childish notions (to use the mildest term) are those to entertain of an All-wise, an Omniscient Being! It is evident from the writings of this author, that he has no true Scriptural idea of God, and no definite idea of man as he is constituted of body and soul. It was the haughty Pharoah who, in the hardness of of his heart, asked this question, "Who is the Lord that I should obey his voice?" (Exod. v. 2;-vii. 14;-viii. 15.) Truly it is a pitiable state of mind, neither to know who the God is that men ought to worship, nor to feel the least disposition to obey his voice; and these are two great defects exhibited in this work. For instance; (p. 465) we read, that "Jehovah is essentially, everlastingly, and unchangeably the same." True. That" God is love." True. (The italics are his own.) Again, he states, that "God is good." True again. And yet we are told (p. 483, 484) that those who convert the scheme of grace into a scheme of works, "It exposes those who are chargeable with it to the undergoing of the divine vengeance in the severest and most awful form in which that vengeance is capable of being inflicted." Thus, the last assertion nullifies the former. The first is a Scripture declaration; the second is Mr. Thom's dogma. And in another page it is asserted that Jesus was the true victim of the divine vengeance!" while in p. 511, he speaks of the Saviour as "the I am;" "In him, as the I am, they are saved." Again, (p. 485) he refers his readers to Isa. xlv. 21, and says, "God's declaration concerning himself is, I am the Saviour" (the italics are his). Now, a more emphatic declaration that our Saviour was Jehovah, the true "God manifested in the flesh," cannot be conceived

than is contained in this passage:-" Who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD (Jehovah), and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and

be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else." Here it is plain that our Redeemer, who is Jesus Christ the Lord, (Luke ii. 11.) is the only God and Saviour; and yet, the author says of Jesus Christ the Redeemer, " His life itself he gave, the moment GOD required it." What God? And how it is, that with such confused notions he can hold the great truth, that Jesus Christ is the Creator also, is marvellous indeed. And yet, this he does, in some sense; for in page 45 he says, "To rise by obedience from earth to heaven was the work of Jesus Christ the Creator, not of Adam the creature." But it would appear that while he speaks of Jesus Christ as the Creator as well as the Redeemer, his views are bordering upon Patripasianism, as in the following sentence: (p. 154.) “Sin reigned unto the death even of the Son of God." (The reign of sin is not predicated of the Son of God, in the passage to which he here refers, viz. Rom. v. 21.) He then proceeds thus:- -"Creature death could not have arrested its reign; but the death of the Creator in the flesh did." These are but a few specimens of the incongruities and most extraordinary notions with which this work abounds, on this and other topics. How confused are the ideas on that essential doctrine of the Word, and of true Christianity, the Divine Object of our love, obedience, and worship! Obedience? It is erased from Mr. Thom's theological vocabulary as a non-essential. It is denounced in almost every page of his book. According to him, it is not required by God under the Christian dispensation: according to his theory, and his bold assertion, too, man never had ability either to obey or to believe. Is not this Calvinism run to seed, or Antinomianism in its foolish dotage? In page 439, it is asserted that man's inability now to obey, or to obey his command to believe, is as much a quality of human nature as when it proceeded from the hands of God." According to this notion, man is a mere automaton or machine, made for the purpose of being experimented upon. Hence the three grand "experiments" of the book and may we not add, that in publishing it, he has a mind to make an experiment upon the credulity of mankind? But what avails his effort, if man has no ability to believe him or his book?

But to his plan. These experiments were as follows; at least, so the writer informs us :

66

The first was made upon one," i. e. Adam ;-" the second upon a whole nation, the Jews;" "and the third upon mankind in general." "The first experiment having implied merely restraint with loss; the second having been a direct test of ability or

inability to obey, with the prospect of gain: and the third being a trial as to whether the creature can abstain from acting altogether, and can acquiesce passively in the reception of a favour which is freely bestowed." "But the two facts spoken of in the two immediately preceding paragraphs, constitute the grand staple of my book." This relates to the two first experiments, which he says are "the two grand facts insisted on by me throughout the foregoing pages." (p. 437.)

From this statement, then, a tolerably correct idea may be formed of the whole book. But can we wonder that such ideas should emanate from a mind in which such crude notions of the Scriptures are entertained as those in the following quotation?"The Scriptures," he says, "present to their minds the aspect of a law, or series of laws, addressed to them by the Almighty. Evils, they suppose it to be the object of the Bible to prohibit: obedience, they suppose it to be the object of that book to enforce." (p. 472.) Can any man seriously and diligently study the Word of God, without at once detecting the glaring fallacy and impiety of such sentiments, and their dangerous tendency? The Deity is virtually represented as trifling with his finite creatures, in a manner which would be reprehensible in one man towards another; by first creating him with no ability to obey, and then giving him laws,―for what purpose? Laws that he never intended should be obeyed, although the finite creature supposed they were given for that purpose, or that otherwise they would not have been given; and thus, the apparent injunctions, it seems, were only self contradictions, his disobedience no sin, and the whole nothing but a deception practised upon his infirm nature. But by whom? The mind shudders at the thought, and refuses to aid the hand to pen the reply. And yet, among other anomalies contained in this work, believers are mentioned in another page as being "free from law and sin, as well as from death;" thus plainly shewing, after all, that man has the faculty of free will, the ability to believe; but it appears to be confined to the elect few. And what are the advantages the believer derives from this? Law (i. e. the divine law) is now and henceforward out of the question. The Scriptures, he now finds, are imposing upon him neither prohibitions nor commands. They are urging him to nothing, either in the shape of abstinence from evil, or performance of good, in order to obtain the divine favour." (471.) It is written, "Without holiness no man shall see the Lord." Be ye holy, for I am holy." "He that doeth righteousness is righteous." "If ye love me, keep my commandments." Surely, then, Mr. Thom's believers are such as are saved by magic, and righteous by proxy, nay, by absolute and irresistible compulsion saved in their sins, not from their sins. They have not N. S. No. 86.-VOL. VIII.

66

66

F

abstained from evil; they have obeyed no divine command, and regarded not the divine prohibitions.

Our prescribed limits will only permit us to notice, further, the author's allusion to the writings of Swedenborg, and to Professor Bush's "Anastasis." Of the first he says, (p. 409.)—

“I unhesitatingly reject Swedenborgianism, or the 'New Jerusalem' system of religion, in most of its leading principles, and as a whole." (How curiously expressed.) "This is not the place for me to say why; elsewhere I have given hints as to my reasons for so doing, and those who take an interest in the subject are referred to what I have already written respecting it." (See my 'Divine Inversion,' sec. v. and vi., and Appendix A.') "One thing, notwithstanding, in favour of this system I would suggest. That there subsist analogies between things heavenly and things earthly, however imperfectly and even erroneously Swedenborgianism may bring them out, is a truth, and a most valuable one.”

That Mr. Thom has not the right key with which to open them, and "bring them out," is abundantly evident from the specimens already given of his notions of the Word of God. He proceeds thus :—

"To correct what is amiss in the Swedenborgian application of this principle, let it always be borne in mind that, in the resemblances subsisting between human and divine things, we can never with truth and safety ascend from the earthly to the heavenly, but must always be content to descend from the heavenly to the earthly; (Rev. xxi. 1.) a circumstance which necessarily implies that he who can do so must previously have become possessed of heavenly principles, or the divine nature. To attempt to rise from the earthly to the heavenly in the prosecution of divine analogies,―(innumerable instances of which characterise and disfigure the Arcana Cœlestia, the De Cœlo et de Inferno, &c.—is a mere exercise of human ingenuity, absolutely worthless in itself, and always of necessity leading into error." (How very modest this from one, the danger of whose writings we have here seen.) "To travel downwards from what is heavenly to what is earthly, led by divine teaching to observe analogies between the natural and the spiritual, soberly, accurately, and truly, is, even now, and in future ages will be still more, one of the most glorious and instructive occupations of the church while in flesh."

These singular remarks are such as might have been expected to issue from one whose curiously-concocted system is as completely at antipodes with the sublime verities contained in the writings of Swedenborg, as it is with the Word of God itself, rightly understood. But, to give the writer his due, in his own words, "All are not spiritually enlightened, and all are not candid." He is at liberty to make the application. Will Mr. T. positively affirm that he has read the Arcana Calestia? He cannot in truth answer in the affirmative. He knows that he has never gone through its pages at all, much less with an unprejudiced mind. Is not the reverend author's system based on the suggestions of his own human fancy?" Let his cold and repulsive

66