ences. With the popular absurd notion of the efficacy of baptisin in his head, Gamaliel Smith objects to the ceremony in the case of Paul, and expatiates on the immoral tendency of the doctrine, that it washes away sins. In answer, Ben David quotes the following passage from Lactantius, (lib. iii. c. 26,) "whose honeyed flow of eloquence procured him the appellation of the Christian Cicero" "The mighty energy of the divine precepts on the minds of men, is demonstrated by daily experience. Give to Christ a man that is irascible, reproachful or impetuous, and, by a few words of God, he will restore him mild as a lamb: give to Christ a man that is covetous and tenacious of his property; and he will give him back to you liberal, and distributing his money with both hands: give to Christ a man that is fearful of pain and of death; and he will presently despise crucifixion, and flames and torments: give to Christ a man that is lustful, an adulterer or a gambler; and you will soon see him sober, chaste and honest: give to Christ a man that is cruel and thirsty for blood; and his fury will be immediately changed into unfeigned clemency: give to Christ a man that is unjust, foolish or an offend er; and he becomes equitable, prudent and inoffensive. For by a single baptism all his wickedness will be washed."-Pp. 197, 198. On the sentence put in italics, Ben David remarks, "The last sentence of this writer illustrates what the early Christians meant by baptism. It was practised by them, not as an atonement for guilt, but as a symbol of moral purity: it was, on the part of those who submitted to it, an open avowal of their faith in Christ, a public declaration that, as his followers, they were determined to forsake their sins, to correct their most favourite passious, to eradicate the most deeply-rooted vices, to imitate the example and obey the precepts of their divine Master. This rite, no doubt, in the course of time became much mistaken and abused. Paul was apprehensive of this consequence; and he declined the practice of it, as forming no part of that gospel which he was commissioned to preach."-P. 198. thor of the "New Trial," &c., that Reverting to a position of the auin Paul's Epistles no trace is to be found of the existence of any such document as one of the four Gospels, Ben David quotes 2 Cor. viii. 18 as a direct testimony on the part of Paul to the Evangelist Luke: "It is well known that Luke was the companion and fellow-labourer of Paul; and in 2 Cor. viii. 18, we meet with these words: We have sent with him our brother, whose praise by means of his gospel is throughout all the churches.' Here we see a person, whom Paul calls a brother, and in the next verse a fellow traveller, praised by all the CHURCHES, and praised too by means of his gospel. It follows then that this gospel was received by all the churches, and that the author was known to all the churches through the medium of his gospel: for this reason he is said to be proved, not by individuals in one place or in many places, to whom he might be personally known, but by all the churches, i. e. by all the societies of Christians who used his gospel. They must, therefore, have esteemed him as an honest man, who had published a history of his divine Master, deserving of universal credit for its accuracy, fidelity and truth.”—Pp. 200, 201. In a note, pp. 286, 287, the author defends this rendering of the passage, and points out the defining power of the Greek article: "Sometimes things can be defined by only being connected: hence the article in Greek becomes a connective serving to attach an adjunct to its subject, or a pro perty to its possessor. In such cases its import in English is expressed by the pronominal adjectives my, thy, his, her, our, your, their. Let us illustrate this application of the Greek article by a few examples. Όταν παραδῷ την βασιλειαν Te Kaι at 1 Cor. xv. 24, 'When he shall deliver up the kingdom to the God and Father, i. e. to his God and Father; which in the common translation is improperly to God even the Father. Επεβαλον τας χείρας επ' αυτόν. Acts xxi. 27, They laid the hands upon him, i. e. their hands upon him.' A Greck epigram has xwλov exec TOY YOUY a's Toy Toda, Thou hast the mind lame as the foot, thou hast thy mind lame as thy foot, thou art lame in mind as well as in feet. The Cyclops in Lucian, complaining to his father Neptune of the injury done him by Ulysses, says, KATEσοφισατο με τῷ ονόματι, he overreached me by the name, i. e. by his name,' the wily traveller having given Our instead of Odvoσeug as his name, which proved the means of saving him from destruction. Let us apply this to one of the many cases the full force of which has been overlooked by the critics, 2 Cor. viii. 8: We have sent with him the brother, whose praise in the gospel is throughout all the churches,-we have sent with him our brother, whose praise by means of his gospel is throughout all the churches. The brother here meant is Luke, whom Paul calls a fellow-traveller in the next verse. It was natural that, as Luke had written a gospel or a memoir of his divine Master, and, as he accompanied the Apostle Paul in establishing the Gentile Church, he should leave a copy in the possession of each church. And here we are very incidentally furnished with a happy testimony to the carly existence of the Gospel of Luke, and to the estimation in which the author of it was held for his fidelity and truth."-Pp. 286, 287. The author afterwards maintains that the Gospel of Luke was not only known and alluded to, but actually "copied by Paul." He founds this novel opinion on 1 Cor. xv. 3. "We have seen that the Apostle speaks of the Gospel of his brother and fellowlabourer, (Luke,) as praised in all the churches. A Gospel thus known to and valued by all the churches, must have been equally known to and valued by Paul himself. Now I observe, and I make the observation with pleasure, that the Gospel of Luke was now open before Paul, and that the above paragraph written by him is but a transcript from it, in substance exactly, in words nearly, the same: and that it is to the authority of this Evangelist that he alludes when he says, For I delivered unto you, among the chief things, WHAT I ALSO RECEIVED, or what I also have taken. Turn to the twenty-fourth chapter of Luke, and there you will find what he has taken :- And he said unto them, These are things which I said unto you while yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then he opened their mind that they might understand the Scriptures. Thus it is written, and thus the Christ ought to suffer, and to rise again from the dead the third day; and repentance and the dismission of sins must be preached in his name among all the nations.' The narrative of Luke implies that our Saviour died—that he was buried-that he rose--that he rose the third day-that he died and rose according to Moses, to the Psalms, and to the Prophets, i. c. according to the Scriptures-that repentance and the dismission of sins was to be preached in his name to the nations and these are precisely the things which are attested by the apostle. It is to be observed, that Paul mentions according to the Scriptures' twice: and the same words are twice implied in Luke. It was not usual with the apostle to designate his divine Master simply under the name of Christ;' but here he so designates him, and designates him once: he is designated, and only once designated, under the same name by the Evangelist. Finally, Luke is the only Evange list who says that Jesus, after his resurrection, appeared unto Simon, and that, after appearing unto Simon, he next appeared to the rest of the disciples. This is said, and said in the same order, by Paul, that he shewed himself to Cephas, (Simon Peter,) and then to the twelve." -Pp. 251, 252. We cannot follow Ben David through all his replies to the Objector, but must content ourselves with taking here and there an interesting passage. On the proposed resolution of James, should be sent to the Gentiles, that in the apostolic council, that a decree offered to idols, and from fornication, they should" abstain from things from blood and from things strangled," our author observes, "The objects of worship among the Pagans, were impure in the extreme. By contemplating and ascribing solemn praise to such beings, the sanction of religion was given to Just and licentiousness; and their very temples were but brothels sacred to lewdness. For this reason idolatry and fornication were ever associated in the language and ideas of a Jew; and James here alludes to a passage in Moses, where they are united as cause and effect: They shall no more offer sacrifices to their false gods, whom they follow to commit fornication.' Lev. xvii. 7. "The Pagans offered blood to the demons, and used it as a rite in invoking the souls of the dead. This we find in -229. In a note (pp. 281-283) on the quotation of Virgil in this passage, the author displays more than his wonted ingenuity. (Ben David and Essenus are the same author.) "The passage in Virgil is thus :- Quæritur; huic geminæ nares, et spi- Multa reluctanti obstruitur; plagisque perempto Tunsa per integram solvuntur viscera pellem.' Homer, Odyss. v. 535. Besides, to shed community in a future world.'"-Pp. 227 blood and to eat it, sounds alike in the ears of civilized society. And not only Moses but the common feelings of our nature, forbid the use of it. Things stran gled, meant animals that were killed without letting their blood: and we are assured, that the offering of victims de. prived of life by strangulation was in the number of the Pagan rites. We meet with a remarkable instance of this kind in the Georgics of Virgil, lib. iv. 299. Aristæus, at the direction of his mother Cyrene, sacrifices four bullocks to appease the wood-nymphs for the restoration of his bees. The manner in which one of them is killed, is thus described: "Then is sought a steer, whose forehead winds with biennial horns; while he violently struggles, both his nostrils and the breath of his mouth are stopped up; and when he is beaten to death, his crushed bowels putrify, while his skin remains entire.' We shall find reason to believe that this vile practice prevailed in Egypt, whence it was borrowed by the Greeks and Romans as early as the days of Moses, and that it is one of the offensive impurities against which his prohibition is levelled. The question in debate was the observance of the ceremonial law. This law consisted of rites that, though not immoral, were useless, burdensome, and odious to the new converts, or of prohibitions that were irrational and debasing in the extreme. Of the first kind was the rite of circumcision; of the second were offerings made to idols, the use of blood and of animals strangled, with every species of impurity kuown to attend the Pagan worship. The decree proposed by James had for its object to cancel every rite that was merely national or ceremonial; while it acknow. ledged and enforced the perpetual obligation of those prohibitions, which were calculated to prevent the corruption of morals, and thus to co-operate with the purifying influence of the gospel. "The reason which this Apostle gives for the resolutions proposed by him, is worthy of observation: For Moses from ancient times has in every city those who preach him, he being read in the synagogue every Sabbath :' which is to this effect: It is in vain for us to hold out to the Gentiles the duty of abstaining from their idolatrous rites and the impurities cousequent on them, on the authority of Moses; for this experiment has been tried, and tried in vain, for ages: it is necessary, therefore, to forbid the same things on a higher authority-the authority of Christ through us; and in his name to enjoin a total abstinence from all such debasing practices as disqualify them to become members of a nobler "Presently it is said that a swarm of bees flew out of this carcase, as a shower from the clouds. Now, if we take this story in a literal sense, it must appear false and ridiculous. But in truth it was never intended to be so understood. The poet intimates, that it originated in Egypt, see Georg. lib. iv. 285. In a little work, entitled "A New Version of the First Three Chapters of Genesis, accompanied with Dissertations, illustrative of the Creation, the Fall of Man, the Principle of Evil, and the Plagues of Egypt,' by Essenus, it is shewn that the facts of the Mosaic history form the basis of the Egyptian mythology. The fable of Aristæus and his bees is another illustration of that assertion. The calf here intended was APIs, whom the Israelites, as devoted to Egyptian superstition, at first worshiped; see Exod. xxxii. The bees which issued from the carcase of this Apis were the Israelites themselves, who escaped from Egyptian bougage, and on the fruits of whose labour, while in slavery, the Egyptians lived as drones in a hive. The Greeks at first seem to have called bees Beyovaι, Ox-begotten, an idea evidently derived with their mythology from Egypt; and it is still more remarkable, that the Latins have preserved, without any change, the original Apis as a general name for bees. "A plague fell on the bees and cattle of Aristæus, because he had violated Euridice, a beautiful woman, and the wife of Orpheus. If we cut off the termination of this last name, and read it from right to left, Orpheus in Hebrew is precisely Pharoah-hence we discover the origin of the fable. A plague was sent on that monarch and his house, because of his conduct to Sarah, wife of Abraham. Gen. xii. 17. Eurydice in escaping is torn by a serpent, and Orpheus recovers her from hades by the charms of his music, but on condition that he should not look back, as she followed him to the region of light. Forgetting, however, this condition, he did look back, and she vanished for ever. The source of this fiction will be found in Genesis xvii. 17"Aristæus, by the assistance of his mother, compels Proteus to explain to 26. him the cause of his disasters. This Proteus was a sea monster, who turned himself at will into all sorts of beasts, but principally into a lion. This we learn from the fourth Odyssey of Homer. The impostors, who delivered oracles in his name, were the authors of the fable about the bees; the main object of which seems to have been to ridicule the Israelites for worshiping as their god a strangled calf. According to Homer, Proteus was not in Egypt, but frequented the shores of an adjacent island: and we find him opposed to Jehovah among the Philistines, under the name of Dagon, which means a fish or corn, as the word is derived from one of two Hebrew terms very similar in sound, though thus different in sense. If then the devotees of Dagon or Proteus, under the fable of the strangled calf and the bees, ridiculed the Israelites and the true God; and if it was usual with Pro teus to metamorphose himself into a lion, we shall see the purport of the following piece of history: Then went Samson down and his father and his mother to Temnath-and behold a young lion roared against him, and the spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him: and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand....And after a time he returned, and he turned aside to see the carcase of the lion, and behold there was a swarm of bees and honey in the carcase of the lion.' Judges xiv. 59. This act was miraculous, inflicted in just and signal vengeance by a servant of the true God, to illustrate the folly and falsehood of those who trusted in the popular gods opposed to him. The punishment inflicted on Dagon, as meaning corn, was also very signal, but different. And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took fire-brands, and turned tail to tail, and put a fire-brand in the midst between two tails. And when he had set the brands on fire, he let them go into the standing corn of the Philistines; and burnt up both the shocks, and also the standing corn, with the vineyards and olives,' chap. xv. 4, 5. The Philistines ascribed this corn to the boun ty of Dagon, and its destruction proved the nullity of the god which they worshiped." Ben David has some very good observations upon Paul's last visit to Jerusalem, so strangely, and we might say, so madly, misrepresented by Gamaliel Smith, and also upon the erronians that Paul represented the end neous apprehension of the Thessaloof the world as at hand, which is, as might have been expected, eagerly laid hold of by the same author as an argument against the apostle; but we can only refer to them, leaving the reader to satisfy himself by a perusal of the volume. In Ben David, the Apostle of the Gentiles has an ardent admirer and No one who has read Gamaliel Smith an ingenious and eloquent advocate. ought to rest contented without reading likewise his learned answerer. We have sufficiently shewn that we cannot yield conviction to Ben David in all his hypotheses and criticisms, but we think, and have pleasure in stating, that the Christian world is indebted to him for his able and honest exposure of an attempt to destroy Christianity by an attack upon the Chief of the Apostles. ART. III.-The History of Christ, a. Testimony to the sole Deity of the Father: and the Connexion between Divine and Human Philanthropy. Two Sermons, preached on the Morning and Evening of Sunday, September 14, 1823, at the Opening of the Unitarian Chapel, Young Street, Charlotte Square, Edinburgh. By W. J. Fox. 8vo. pp. 44. Edinburgh, Bell and Bradfute; London, C. Fox and Co. ART. IV. - The Spirit of Unitarian Christianity. A Sermon, delivered at the Opening of the Finsbury Unitarian Chapel, on Sunday, Feb. 1st, 1824: To which is prefixed, An Address, delivered on laying the First Stone of the Chapel, on Thursday, May 22nd, 1823. By W. J. Fox. 8vo. pp. 36. C. Fox and Co. ther," the preacher concludes with an exhortation to consistency and firmness in the profession of the truth, to zeal for its diffusion, and to conformity with its dictates. He says, as truly as eloquently, "Distraction and depression are the natural results of the notions of a plurality of divine persons, and of the vindictiveness of divine justice. They hide the truth, and, of course, obstruct and weaken, if not destroy, the feelings of pious gratitude which would spring up in its light. Above, heaven bends in benignant loveliness; and below, earth smiles in grateful and responsive fruitfulness, like God and the heart of man; but the interposing cloud that veils the glories of the one, casts a broader and deeper circle of gloom upon the other. From you that cloud has passed away. Soon may it in all regions, that to Him whose right they are, the prayers, and thanksgivings, and hearts of his children may be restored. The services for which this building is destined are not those of vain forms, or slavish feelings, or sectarian narrowness. It is the worship of the Father, in spirit and in truth,' that we would cultivate; not only here, but in our bosoms, our homes, our lives. We revere him in all the spirituality of his nature, the immensity of his presence, the paternity of his character. The universe is his temple; the dome of heaven its lofty roof; the plain of earth its wide basis; sun, moon and stars its glittering ornaments; every contrite heart an altar, every upright man a priest; and obedience and sincerity the incense that shall ascend to his palace and his throne, and draw down kis gracious benediction."-Pp. 25, 26. The Evening Sermon at Edinburgh is an argument, from 1 John iv. 11, for the truth of Unitarianism as a benevolent system, illustrating the love of God, and thus producing love to man. Mr. Fox here assumes the doctrine of universal restoration. The "Connexion between Divine and Human Philanthropy" is shewn by the following observations: 1. The mere exhibition of excellence disposes the observer to imitation. 2. The imitation of God is a Christian duty. 3. The condition on which God blesses each, is solicitude for the well-being of the whole. 4. The usual expression of divine love is the relation of Parent to us, and to all, which implies our fraternal relation to one another. 5. The object of God's love in the gospel is to excite, enlarge and strengthen VOL. XIX. 4 L this mutual affection. 6. If God, the pure and infinite Spirit, loves man, much more should we, brethren in infirmity and sins, love each other. 7. God's love has endowed us with a common nature, deduced us from a common origin, and it designs for us ultimately a common destiny of joy. In the second of these pamphlets, the Address on laying the First Stone of Finsbury Unitarian Chapel, stands at the beginning. It is a concise, perspicuous and manly declaration of Unitarianism, and an impressive description of the moral uses of a Christian House of Prayer. A pleasing tribute of gratitude and respect is paid towards the end to Winchester and Vidler, the former pastors of the congregation; and the Address terminates with a short, appropriate and solemn invocation of the Divine blessing. The Sermon on the opening of the Chapel, from Rom. viii. 9, has for its object to vindicate the Unitarian system by demonstrating that its spirit is precisely the spirit of the gospel. The preacher selects for instances the several topics of piety; faith; liberty and liberality; holiness; philanthropy, and hope. Some excellent observations are made (pp. 17-23) upon faith, which Mr. Fox treats, not as the belief of a. "confistring of propositions, but as dence in a faithful or benignant God." The preacher sums up the subject of discourse, and exhibits a glowing practical illustration of it, in the following passage: "We are strong in the plain and literal declarations of the New Testament; but we are yet stronger in the sameness of the general impression made by Christianity and Unitarianism as to the moral qualities with which these declarations are associated in the teacher's mind, and which they are designed to produce in the convert. The machinery is the same; the object the same: our system has the spirit of Christ, and is his, and Christianity is Unitarianism. And were it needful to illustrate this practically, not hard would be the task; for men who have had an abiding and universal sense of the Divine presence, who have shewn that God was in all their thoughts, and who seem to have made the very state of consciousness an act of adoration: men who with filial confidence could cast themselves on his protection, and obey the |