he possessed more knowledge, he probably would not have been pardoned. J. N. intimates, that I have not fairly stated the question. An objection, he says, may be fairly raised against the manner in which I have stated the subject, when I said that the apostle was represented as saying, that he obtained mercy because he was ignorant of the nature of true religion; that his ignorance was the reason why he was pardoned. No one, he observes, would imagine that the apostle was pardoned because of his ignorance-that is, without repentance and faith in Christ. Most truly, I never supposed that Saul of Tarsus was, or that any other person is, or could be, pardoned, without repentance and faith. If a man is forgiven, it is because, in the cheering language of our Lord," he hath believed on the only begotten Son of God." Now, Sir, if I was wrong in making that statement, the error did not originate with me; for that is the very thing which the apostle affirms. Was it wrong in me to say, that, according to the ordinary version, he obtained mercy because he was ignorant?-it was equally wrong for the apostle to say so; yet this is what he states. He says, "I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief." The error, therefore, if there is one, is not mine, but that of the apostle or his translators. It will be alleged, perhaps, the language of the writer was elliptical, and that repentance and faith were supposed, though not mentioned. Very true; that is exactly what I believe. But, then, if it was proper for the sacred penman to speak by the figure ellipsis, it was equally proper for me. I suppose that he did not, in virtue of inspiration, enjoy a monopoly of that figure. In short, I have stated the matter exactly as the apostle, in one version, states it, and, as near as may be, in the identical words. The unfairness, therefore, is not chargeable on me. I only enunciate the proposition with that brevity which the figure ellipsis admits, and of which the passage furnishes me with an example.

But, Sir, J. N. seems to doubt whether ayvos is ever used in the New Testament, in a moral sense, as denoting guilt and sin. He says it was incumbent on me to give a little more evidence in justification of my rendering of αγνοειν. He observes, it is not used in that sense in the New Testament. Now, here I must remark, that the occasional and peculiar senses of words are sometimes of rare occurrence; but that circumstance does not make the reality of such uses doubtful, as is well known to all philologists. In English, the verb to make, signifies to create, to form, to produce; but it has a secondary and occasional use, and signifies to compel, to force (e. g., Will you not? then I will make you). A foreigner, learning our language, might perhaps find only one instance of that usage in a voluminous author, and he might search other writers and find no instance at all, though the verb in its ordinary and proper sense was of constant occurrence. But would the secondary sense on that account be doubtful to a person skilled in our tongue ? So also, of the Hebrew word 772. The proper meaning is to bless; this is its ordinary and well-known use. But it also signifies to curse, to blaspheme. Yet a person might read several Hebrew authors without finding a single instance of that use; and when he does meet with it, it occurs only once or twice. No one, however, who is acquainted with the nature of language would, for that reason, deny that it had such an application. These examples may suffice to show that we have no right to demand many instances of the peculiar and secondary meaning of a word. But with regard to ayvoew, if J. N. consults competent authorities, he will find that the use I have assigned it is recognised and admitted. Schleusner gives this as one of its meanings. He thus translates it:-" Peccatum committo, iniquus sum nullâ ignorantiâ adjunctâ." And when speaking of the noun ayvonpa (ignorance), he gives, as its third meaning, "peccatum quod vis voluntarium." He instances Hebrews v. 2, but not as doubtful, and translates it, “Qui in

dulgere posset peccantibus." "The ignorance," says M'Lean, "is not such as arises merely from want of instruction or natural capacity; but from a culpable defect in the will, and want of due attention to the rule of duty." Schleusner also adduces Hebrews ix. 7, where the apostle says the high priest offered (sacrifices) for himself, and for the sins of the people. To which he adds five instances from the Apocrypha, which is admitted to be Greek of the same kind with that of the New Testament. The truth is, it is an Hebraism. Though the apostle wrote Greek, and used words in the proper Greek sense, yet it was next to impossible for him, familiar as he was with Old Testament phraseology, entirely to exclude Hebrew usages and idioms. He also finds multis exemplis of the same peculiarity in the historian Polybius.

With regard to the concessive use of or, I shall only repeat what I have before stated. It is certain that the Hebrew is concessive, as well as causal. Now, the particle or is the word by which it is translated; and the instances of its former use, which I have pointed out in the New Testament, are satisfactory. If any one supposes they are not, let the experiment be tried on those passages; let them be translated as if the particle were causal, and the point will be easily decided. The same learned authority, after other uses of the word, observes, "Est conjunctio concessiva; notans quamvis, quanquam, etsi, etiamsi."

But, passing over the philology of the passage, and admitting that both renderings are legitimate, the question returns, which should we adopt? J. N. thinks that I have not sufficiently considered those passages which speak of ignorance as mitigating the greatness of sin. I have said already, that there are many circumstances which diminish or increase the guilt of sin, and that ignorance is certainly one of the former description. The greater the light, the greater the criminality. He that knew not his master's will, is beaten with few stripes; whilst he who knew his master's will, and sinned notwithstanding, will be beaten with many stripes. "This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men have loved darkness rather than light." "If I had not come unto them, they had not had sin (not in the same degree); but now they have no cloak for their sin;" and in the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah, who enjoyed not the light of revelation, than for Chorazin and Bethsaida, who were blessed with it in the ministry of the Messiah and his apostles. J. N. quotes Luke xxiii. 34, "Father, forgive them, they know not what they do," and other passages of the same kind. Now, the question is not whether these men were ignorant, nor whether their ignorance diminished the enormity of their guilt. The question is, whether it was the intention of the apostle in this place to refer to his ignorance in the same way; or whether, agreeably to the other rendering, he meant to describe the magnitude of his sins, and to show that he was pardoned notwithstanding.

The latter appears to me the most natural-most in accordance with the known character of the apostle's mind, as well as with the scope of the passage. We shall see that the two cases are not parallel-namely, those of the passages cited by J. N., and that of the apostle in 1 Tim. i. 13. In the former, our Lord speaks of the offences of others; in the latter, the apostle speaks of his own. The former prays for others, and, therefore, naturally looks about for mitigating circumstances. The mind of the compassionate Saviour, yearning with mercy over those wicked and unhappy men who were putting him to death, fastens on the circumstance of their ignorance: Pardon them, for they do not know what they are doing. But, in the latter instance, the writer speaks of his own wickedness, and, instead of looking about for mitigating circumstances to lessen its enormity, seems to contemplate only those circumstances which tend to set it forth. It is not by extenuating and diminishing his sins-not by remembering that they might have been greater

than they were that he entertains the hope of forgiveness. No, he founds that hope on the riches of grace-the exceeding greatness of the divine mercy. He obtained pardon though he was the vilest of the vile; though the first-born of transgressors-the chief of sinners; though his sins were of the deepest dye. "Though his soul had been like scarlet, it had become white as snow; though once red as crimson, it was now as wool." The absurdity of the ordinary rendering appears in this, that it makes the apostle say, he obtained mercy though he was the chief of sinners, and yet that he obtained it because he was not the chief of sinners; for to sin in ignorance, and not to be the chief of sinners, are one and the same. Surely, it was not natural for him to say, that he obtained mercy upon repentance because he was not the chief of sinners; and, at the same time, that he obtained it in spite of being so.

Before I conclude this brief rejoinder, I must observe, I am not surprised that many should feel tenacious of the common view of this passage. It is pleasing to a benevolent, Christian mind. It encourages hope in relation to some of the heathen, who have sinned in ignorance; in relation to many in Christendom, whose minds are veiled and darkened by their situation in society, their connexions, and education; and in relation to individuals of the nation of the Jews, brought up under inveterate prejudices against the Christian religion, I should be sorry to extinguish any ray of hope, however small, on these awful subjects. The picture of man's destinies is gloomy enough, without depriving it of any of those softening hues and lights which here and there fall on the scene. At the same time we must not suffer our feelings to dictate our sentiments, nor should we believe a proposition because we wish it to be true-the commonest error, perhaps, in theology, and more fruitful of mistakes and false views than any other, or than all others put together. In relation to those for whose salvation we hope against hope, I believe the Judge of all the earth will do right-right, in the most enlarged sense, comprehending not only justice and equity, but the most consummate wisdom, and the most perfect benevolence. But how, and in what manner, I pretend not to determine, seeing it is a subject not revealed in Scripture; and one on which human reason is not competent to decide. "We walk by faith, not by sight."

Olney, August 29th.

J. S.

SABELLIANISM.

DEAR SIR,—One of your correspondents wishes for a definition of Sabellianism. Perhaps the writer of the note to which he refers, will come forward to satisfy his demands: if not, you may, if you please, make use of this communication. A Sabellian is, I conceive, one who believes that the person denominated in Scripture, the Son of God, was the Father incarnate. If I understand the sentiment aright, it means that the Father, instead of sending a person into the world to redeem mankind, came himself; that the term "the Son of God," is the name which the Father assumed when he was born of a woman. A Sabellian also maintains that the designation "the Holy Ghost" is only a name for the divine power-a sort of poetical personification of an abstraction. In short, Sabellianism is a theory adopted in order to get rid of the doctrine of the Trinity. According to this view of the phraseology of Scripture, when the apostles were directed to baptize believers in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the true meaning was, that-making use of the most precise and proper language they were to baptize them in the name of the Father, of the Father incarnate, and of the Divine Power. If I have not defined Sabellianism correctly, I shall be happy to be set right by one who is "not yet fifty." Sabellius was not the author of this creed. It was the invention of one Noëtius, a divine of the third century. Yet, since it has always gone under his name, it is not worth

while to change it. I do not see what would be gained by calling it Noëtianism instead of Sabellianism. It is not my wish to provoke controversy on the subject in your pages; but, as a definition has been called for, it seems proper that one should be given.

I would, however, observe, in concluding this note, that the Sabellian appears to me virtually to deny "that the Son of God is come in the flesh;" and that, as to the doctrine of the Holy Ghost, he is in the predicament of some of whom we read in the Acts of the Apostles, who did not know whether there was a Holy Ghost; for they, I suppose, as well as Sabellians, believed in the power of God. That all amongst us who are not yet fifty, as well as those who have passed that meridian, may know and follow the truth; that our churches may be preserved from heresy in doctrine as well as from practical evils, is the earnest desire of one who does not choose to tell his age; though he can conscientiously add, for the comfort and edification of your correspondent, that he is not as yet under the necessity of pleading guilty to grey hairs.

I am, dear Sir, yours truly,

AMOS ANON.

me say,

COMMUNION.

DEAR SIR,-I shall esteem it a favour if you will allow me the opportunity of correcting, in the pages of the "Record," a misstatement of Mr. Brock's, in his letter on "Communion," which appeared in the June number. Referring to a communication from T. D., in the March number, he makes "We cannot have too much evidence of true faith as a prerequisite for baptism;" whereas, if he will only look again, he will see I said, "We cannot have too much evidence of true faith in receiving members into the church; and, therefore, to require baptism over and above others, but not as a substitute for them, must be so far a greater security against the introduction of unconverted persons." I would not have troubled myself with making this correction, but for the bad use he makes of the quotation. I said nothing of the evidence of faith as a prerequisite for baptism.

As to the soundness or unsoundness of the principle of making the practices of the apostles binding on us, I would just observe, either it is sound or not in all practices, in some or in none. If sound in none, there is an end of the apostolic succession for ever; if in some, and the practice of admitting baptized believers only to the Lord's Supper be one, then, at all events, it is sound, as far as any strict Baptist wishes to apply it, on the subject of communion. I shall be glad if Mr. Brock will favour us with a boundary line, plainly marking out the extent to which it will be safe to follow the apostles, beyond which, I suppose, we must follow tradition.

Васир.

THOS. DAWSON.

IMPORT OF THE PARABLE OF THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS. SIR,-I shall feel greatly obliged if some one of your able correspondents will have the goodness to point out what is the precise import of the parable of Dives and Lazarus; whether it was designed to teach some one important fact, doctrine, or precept, while the main parts of the parable serve merely as the drapery of a picture to set forth the principal object more prominently; or are we to understand it as conveying instruction on various points, as the existence of the soul (of the WICKED as well as the righteous) in a separate state-its actual suffering in that state, as in the case of Dives, in something synonymous with a corporeal form-the commencement of the punishment of the wicked before the judgment day, and immediately upon death ensuing-or is it intended simply to teach us the right distribution of property as a means of doing good, and which our Lord, having been inculcating (ver. 9-13), now enforces in this awful and impressive form?

Oxford.

Yours truly,

N. S. Y.

689

PASSING LITERARY NOTES.

NEW MARGINAL READINGS AND REFERENCES ON THE FOUR GOSPELS. Adapted to the Authorised Version of the Holy Scriptures. With a Harmony, and Occasional Notes. 12mo. pp. By the Rev. Wм. BURGH, A.B. A New and Improved Edition. Shaw, London.

THE object of this very useful work is to give, in a small compass, to the great mass of readers of the Scriptures, the advantage now confined to ministers, and the limited number of others who have the time and means for extensive theological studies, of the light thrown on many passages by the labours of various critical annotators. This is done (1.) by an extension of the various readings of the received version, so as to embrace almost every material improvement of the authorised text. (2.) By a collection of marginal references, for the purpose of comparing spiritual things with spiritual; making them as complete as possible, with reference to things rather than words. (3.) By occasional notes, for the most part critical, showing the exact meaning of particular terms. Many difficulties occurring to the reader of the Gospels are solved by this work of Mr. Burgh; and we hope he will meet with such encouragement as shall induce him to carry forward his labours to the remaining books of the New Testament.

THE BAPTIST IRISH SOCIETY: Its Origin, History, and Prospects. With an Outline of the ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF IRELAND, and a LECTURE enforcing its claims on the sympathy and efforts of Christians in England. 8vo. Houlston and Stoneman.

WE had hoped to have given a lengthened notice of this important volume in our present number. Obliged to forego our intention, we yet cannot allow the month to pass without commending it very earnestly to our readers' attention. The portion occupied by the Ecclesiastical History brings to view, within a brief space, much sterling information, which cannot be procured elsewhere, except by laborious and costly research. As we follow the thread of the narrative, our deepest interest is excited; and we rise from the perusal with mingled feelings of shame, indignation, despondency, and hope; but with solemn convictions of the importance of that Society, at whose instance this cheap and excellent volume has been prepared.

PETRA, THE CITY OF THE DESERT. A Poem.

NEHEMIAH. A Poem. By JAMES TALBOYS WHEELER. Shrimpton, Oxford.

In both these poems the author displays much vividness of conception, and great command of language. "Petra," the larger poem, contains many passages of great beauty; and is, indeed, a production of a superior order. 'Nehemiah," not as the better, but as more within our space, we have introduced to our readers, that they may decide on its merit for themselves. We believe that those who procure this small but handsome work for themselves will admit, that Mr. Wheeler has given us real poetry in a very pretty dress.

THE SICK VISITOR'S COMPANION. By JOHN CORBIN. pp. 66. Snow, London; W. Pike, Derby.

MANY benevolent persons have felt the obligation of visiting the sick for religious purposes, but have confessed a reluctance from a feeling of incompetency to conduct an interview with the afflicted, so as really to benefit their souls. Mr. Corbin has undertaken to provide suitable assistance for such in the shape of a selection of passages of Scripture, short addresses, and prayers, adapted to various classes of character. We think Mr. Corbin's little work will prove both welcome and useful.