existence of our Saviour. Without entering into the particulars of the investigation, which could not easily be abridged, we find, in the very beginning of it, a note which contains fo just a remark with respect to the early errors on the fubject of our Saviour, that we are induced to infert the chief part of it. "It has been continually pretended, that what is thought to favour the doctrine of the Trinity and the two natures of our bleffed Lord, in the evangelical and apoftolical writings, was di rectly pointed against the Gnoftics, who had interwoven their ftrange fancies with the fimple truths of Chriftianity. What the Gnoftics brought to the Gofpel is one thing, what they derived from it another. I confefs it has for a long time appeared to me capable almost of demonstration, that inftead of the Trinitarian terms (if I may fo exprefs myfelf) being oppofed to the Gnoftic herefies, the latter are a ftrong confirmation that the Trinitarian doctrines were exprefsly taught and countenanced by our Lord and his Apostles. I agree exceedingly with the learned Macknight, in what he fays for instance of the Docete and Cerin thians, who fell into oppofite extremes in their opinions concerning Jefus Chrift. "It is probable," fays he, "that the Apoftles taught, and that the firft Chriftians believed Chrift to be God and Man, for if the Docete had not been taught the divinity of Chrift, they had no temptation to deny his humanity; and if the Cerinthians had not been taught the humanity of Chrift, they would have been under no neceffity of denying his divinity." This, I confefs, exactly accords with what has long been my own private opinion, as to all the leading features of the Gnoftic herefies; for inftance, how came Simon Magus, their great leader, and undoubted contemporary of Chrift, and his Apoftles, to pretend to be the Supreme God thus diftinguifhed: the Father among the Samaritans, the Son among the Jews, and the Holy Spirit among the heathens, if thefe terms or notions had not been fuggefted to him by the Apostles of Christianity, whom he meant both to oppofe and rival? How came he (according to Mr. Jones, who places a confidence in the Homilies of Clement of R.) to lay claim to the Eye E of our Lord, fo as to induce even Dafitheus to worship him, unless he had well underftood the full force of that remarkable expreffion, though he might difpute, like others, our Lord's own pretenfions to it?" P. 65. The following obfervation alfo appears to us replete with truth, yet modeffly expreffed. "Whenever I am engaged in these refearches I confefs, (though I would wish to fay it without offence) that I feel astonished at the trifling criticisms of modern Unitarians; the low ideas they feem to have of the Scripture phrafeology; and their direct con tradiction tradiction of plain matters of fact. I can fcarcely bring myfelf to turn to their references, fo totally do they feem to carry us away from the real object of difcuffion. Because for inftance, St. John ufes agx", in fome paffages of his Gofpel, to exprefs the beginning of his miniftry; it is inferred that it cannot poffibly imply more in the firft verfe of the firft chapter, whereas the real and true queftion is, not what the general meaning of may be, but whether in this particular paffage, St. John could mean less than that beginning of things, defcribed in the first chapter of Genefis, when the world was made, according to the Targumifts, by the Memra Jehovah, or WORD of GOD. That beginning, as Grotius infifts, "Cum primum rerum Univerfitas cæpit creari." "What frange, I must fay rather what deceitful criticism, it feems to be to fend the unlearned to paffages in which the term beginning evidently implies the "beginning" of Chrift's miniftry, in order to induce them to believe that St. John could not have intended it in any other fenfe in the first ver. of his Gofpel, though it had been a tradition of long standing both among Jews and Gentiles, that in the beginning of all things, God had created the world by his WORD or Logos?" P. 73. After illuftrating the remarkable words of Malachi, in "Beza has well obferved "Quotiefcunque fit Principi mentio, fignificationem illius ad id de quo accommodare neceffe eft."-It certainly appears to us, that an apps is ufed in quite different fenfes, in the 1ft Epift. of John,-in the 24th verfe of the 11th chapter for inftance, as Grotius fays, a axns fumendum eft, de tempore, prædicati Evangelii; but in the ft verfe of the ift ch. "idem tempus notari quod in primis verbis Evangelii Johannis et in Geneseos." The prefent Editors take upon them to tell us that it is otherwife, but we cannot believe them, nor can I help expreffing my furprize, that the learned Whitby fhould think it neceffary to interpret an apxns uniformly through out thefe Epiftles; because in the 3d chap. of the 1ft Epift. ver. 8, it feems manifeftly to be used in the fenfe of the beginning of the world, οτε απ' ορχης ο διαβολος αμαρτάνει, which ought alone to carry any Chriftian back to that beginning of things, when the feed of the woman, was promifed to bruife the ferpent's head: I have faid fo much upon this fubject in a former note, that I need not dwell longer upon it at prefent than to declare it to be my firm opinion, notwithstanding the decifions of many great fcholars may be against me, that ar aps, in the beginning of St. John's Epiftles, expreffes the actual pre-existence of that Being who was manifefted in the flesh for our redemption, that Being whofe des or goings forth, were an' appens, & nu.por aires, as Micah terms it." his third chapter, "The Lord whom ye feek fhall fuddenly come to his temple," &c. Mr. E. N. fays, "this is the fort of knowledge which the Unitarians defpife as myftical and unintelligible, but it is purely fcriptural. It is capable of being understood without the illuflration of Targumists or Rabbins. It is to be found in the Bible, in the very words and terms of Scripture; it may be obfcured or misreprefented, but it cannot be annihilated." P. 87. After illuftrating, fomewhat at large, the opening of St. John's Gofpel, the author paffes to the beginning of the Epiftle to the Hebrews, in which the pre-exiflence of Chrift is alfo ftrongly afferted. This difcuffion is continued with force and clearness, as far as the 125th page, when the author adverts more generally to the purpofe and defign of the pretended improved Verfion. In commencing this part, he gives fo good a view of the method ufed by the fai-difant improvers, that we are tempted to infert it. "The profeffed defign of the Improved Verfion, as stated in the introduction, is to refcue the public from the "technical phrafeology of a fyftematic theology:" this gives a strange air to many of their notes; the general mode of inftruction is in the way of affirmation. Pains are generally taken to tell the ignorant what things are, as for inftance, what a ranfem is, what a facrifice, what a propitiation, what a fin-offering, &c. But the ftyle of thefe Editors is totally different. The whole of their efforts are directed to the difcovery and relation of what things are not, a ransom is not a ranfom, nor a facrifice a facrifice; fins are not fins, nor bearing of fins bearing of fins, interceffion is not interceffion, nor propitiation, propitiation. This is puzzling enough to be fure, but I fuppofe not beyond the capacity of thefe improvers. If they understand themfelves, their capacity muft indeed be great, for their fyftem appears to me, I must freely confefs, fo oppofite to the real language of Scripture, as to be wholly irreconcileable to it." P. 125. Thefe affertions are afterwards diftin&tly proved, and these methods of improvement not only exemplified but exa mined. At page 144 the doctrine of atonement is confidered a good deal at large; and at page 163, the text of Romans ix. 5, on which the Unitarian improvers have curioufly employed their talents, Philippians ii. 6-9 is dif cuffed at page 176, and Coloffians i. at page 181. The neceffity of commenting thos upon detached paffages, as they appear to have been mifreprefented by the Unitarians, neceflarily gives fomewhat of a defultory appearance to thefe Remarks. Should they be reprinted, which we think extremely probable, an index of paffages fo difcuffed, will be a very proper addition to the work; and will give it, in fome degree, the utility of a comment on the New Teftament. In taking our leave of a book in which we naturally feel fo ftrong an intereft, we must ftill be allowed to fay, that it appears to us to be ftrongly argued, with found and good learning as to Greek, and occafionally Hebrew criticifm. The introduction explains the motives and designs of the author; and is particularly valuable for an eflimation of the various readings on St. John's Gofpel, as they appear in the editions of Wells and Griefbach *, by which it is fhown that, notwithstanding their number, they very immaterially affect the fenfe. It would be useful to extend this kind of eftimate to all the books of the N. T, but the refult is in fome degree exhibited in Dr. White's late edition t. ART. 10. BRITISH CATALOGUE, POETRY. The Pleasures of Friendship; a Poem, in two Parts. By Frances Arabella Rowden. 12mo. 139 PP. 75. Longman, &c. 1810. The fubject of this poem, how often foever it may have been difcuffed, can never fail to be interefting to any feeling mind; and in reading the work before us, fuch minds will be interested (we think) fomewhat deeply. "The following pages are an attempt to delineate the pleafures arifing from the mutual endearments of FRIENDSHIP, with all the great and heroic deeds infpired by this difinterested feeling of the foul. It is defcribed as the firft of intellectual enjoyments, the most valuable of all earthly poffeffions, and the indiffoluble bond, by which virtuous hearts are connected. Hence reciprocal acts of kindness are performed, and mutual facrifices made, which conftitute the general order, harmony, and happiness of created na ture. It is not only confidered as referring to the endearments of focial life, and the attachment of friends, but as embracing the tender fympathies of parenta', filial, and conjugal affections," P. vii. * This extends from page xxv to xxx. F 3 The The dedication to Mifs Mitford, whofe ingenious Poems we. reviewed in May last, p. 515*, and one page from the Poem, will probably induce many of our readers to become poffeffed of the whole work. "When with a master's ardent foul inspir'd, His bold conception rang'd the fphere of thought, ART. 11. Mifcellaneous Poetry. By Thomas Green, jun. of Li, verpool. 12mo. 3s. Longman. 1810. Some of thefe effufions are tolerable enough; but we should not have advised their publication, with the head of the author, who, in all refpects, appears to be a very young man. One of the beft things in the volume, is the dedication to the author's father, in We have obferved another erratum in that article: line feven from the bottom, for "deaf'ing war," read "deaf'ning roar." the |