The abfurdities of the Cabaliftical fyftem of interpre tation, are next the object of cenfure; nor is the Hutchinfonian discovery of divine truths in Hebrew words, fpared by the ingenious preacher, though he admits that this is a lefs puerile purfuit than the former. But it is in his attack on the Sinian mode of interpretation, that Dr. Laurence difplays he greatest vigour of argument. This part of the Sermon we extract with great pleasure.

"For ingenuity in compelling many a celebrated text to speak a language repugnant to its apparent signification, we may allow Socinus. and his followers as much credit as they require, if indeed credit may be so obtained; but we cannot surely on that account, without violence to the epithet, denominate them, what they exclusively affect to be, rational expositors. What passage of Scripture can be clearer, than the Answer of our Saviour to the Jews, who, when they enquired of him, whether he, who was not then fifty years old, had seen Abraham, replied, "Before Abraham was, I am," plainly ascribing to himself an existence prior to that of Abraham. But the Socinians have invented a different explication. They have observed that the aorist yevola, may be taken (but certainly not in this instance with grammatical propriety) in a future sense, with respect to the time when the conversation took place, and that Abraham means not the person of the patriarch, but merely the import of his name, so that the words, giv Abgaau, yevrolar yw, should be rendered, "Before he of whom you speak shall become Abraham," or what that name indicates, "the father of many nations," (which is still further to be explained in a spiritual sense, and considered as having taken place, when the salvation of the Jews was extended to the Gentiles,) "I am," I the light of the world appear; that is, I the Messiah exist, before the Gentiles can approach my splendor, and hail the brightness of my rising. But can we suppose, that his indignant hearers, had they thus understood him, would have taken up stones to stone him for blasphemy; or that our Saviour himself, instead of directly replying to the question proposed, would have completely avoided it, and that for the sole purpose of advancing an almost incontrovertible proposition, not less uninteresting than irrelevant, and only remarkable for a miserable play upon words without point, and a lamentable dislocation of idea without example? To particularize such a comment, so intricate and involved, so injurious to the character of our Redeemer, as well as so much at war with the context, is indeed to refute it. "But their most frequent mode of perverting unambiguous phrases, is by a confident imputation of Hebraisms, to which they give a construction suitable to the particular object in their view, Thus they consider the denomination, "Son of God," so often ascribed to our Saviour, as a kind of Hebrew idiom, which signifles no more than a person favoured by the Almighty, and which

is therefore destitute of characteristical emphasis, while they regard the other denomination usually ascribed to him, "Son of Man," 28 indeed of the same description, yet as distinctly and strongly em, phatical, purposely employed to prevent the possibility of conceiving him to be any thing more than a mere man. But this double and contradictory application of a similar idiom is perfectly untenable. For if the words "Son of Man" emphatically signify one, who is truly and properly man, must it not follow by parity of reasoning, that the words "Son of God" emphatically also signify one, who is truly and properly God? The fact is, both are alike emphatical, although the first seems, generally at least, if not always, used in a sense wholly different from the Socinian. For as the appellation "Son of Man," which occurs in a well known prophecy of Daniel, was appropriated by the Jewish expositors in the time of Christ to the promised Messiah, a circumstance which the Targum of Jonathan, still extant, puts beyond a doubt, we must immediately perceive the object of it, especially when we recollect, that our Saviour himself alludes to this identical prophecy, and speaks of his own advent in the very expressions of Daniel, as that of the Son of Man, or the Messiah, (terms understood to be equivalent to each other,)" coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." With respect to the appellation" Son of God," it seems only necessary to observe, that, when St. Peter says to his divine Master, "We believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," if the phrase meant no more than a mere man in high favour with God, the answer of our Lord would have been singular and unaccountable, who replied, "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood have not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven;" because certainly, according to the Socinian explanation of the terms, a revelation from heaven would have been superfluous.

"Nor is their frequent appeal to conjectural idiom attended with worse consequences, than their perpetual substitution of fancied metaphor, particularly when they endeavour by it to gloss away the meaning of almost every passage in Scripture, relating to the true nature of Christian redemption. They argue that when it is said, "The blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin," or when any similar phrase is introduced, nothing more is intended, than that the blood of Christ, which was shed in testimony to the truth of his doctrines, enables us, by admitting that truth, and practising those doctrines, to cleanse ourselves from all sin; so that the expressions "blood of Christ," are made, by a long chain of interme diate reasoning, to stand figuratively for Christian morality. Such a perplexed and subtle style of interpretation may perhaps gratify the vanity of writers, who deride the faith and despise the talents of all other commentators; but it must always be disapproved by those who prefer plain and unembarrassed to confused and impli cated expositions, to expositions equally remote from Gospel truth as from Gospel simplicity."

The

The conclufion of this discourse gives the following found advice, which cannot be too carefully regarded by all ftudents in theology, and particularly by thofe who enter upon a critical inquiry into, and an elucidation of the facred volume.

"From a retrospect then of what has been observed, we may conclude, that in traversing the wide field of philological speculation and biblical criticism, we cannot too accurately examine the solidity of the ground, upon which we tread. Various indeed are the modes, which a warm imagination may suggest, to render a good cause more alluring, and a bad one less obnoxious; but after all, plain, direct, and substantial argument is the only sure basis of rational conviction. In many cases we may indeed innocently amuse ourselves with the fond reveries of a favourite system; but we should not forget that other minds may be more fastidious, and that truth is always admitted with reluctance, where fiction is only in part suspected. And if the propriety of keeping within due limits be apparent, when the theorist is solely anxious to illustrate points of general persuasion, what ought to be his caution, when he is proceeding in a contrary direction, when he is attempting untried novelties, and hazarding uncertain conjectures! Let him at least reflect, that to venture on a precipice with indifference is folly, and without necessity a crime."

There is an appendix of curious notes fubjoined to this interefting fermon, which will afford much valuable infor mation to every serious reader.

Poetry.

ON THE DESTRUCTION OF PHAROAH.

[From Mr. Rollefton's Prize Poem, entitled "Mofes under the direction of Divine Providence, &c." Oxford. 12mo, 1807.]

·B

UT where is Egypt now? Where all her might,
Her fteeds, her cars, her thousands arm'd for fight?
Where is the banner'd pride that wav'd fo high?
And where the trump that told of victory?
All, all are paft; the chain'd and fetter'd deep,
Loos'd from its bonds, at one tremendous sweep

Whelm'd

Whelm'd all their hopes, and not a wreck is seen
To tell to future times that they had been.-
And thou, infatuate Prince, of stubborn mould,
Aw'd by no terrors, by no pow'r controll'd!
Haft thou too felt that arm thy foul defied?
How is thy glory fall'n! how chang'd thy pride!
For Hope had fondly deem'd thy death-cold clay
Should mock Corruption's worm, nor know decay;
But ne'er thy fcatter'd bones fhall now be hid
In the dark bed of thy proud pyramid:

But thou, vain boafter, and thy meanest flave,
Alike muft glut the monfters of the wave.

And now, perchance, redeem'd of Heav'n, for you
Hope paints new lands, in Fancy's faireft hue;
Of fcenes perchance fhe tells, more heav'nly bleft
Than Tempe's vale, or Leuce's fabled reft,
Where vernal flowers 'mid Autumn's fruitage blow,
Where milky ftreams, and honied waters flow;
Ah, truft her not! Yet ftay, fond flatt'rer, ftay,
For long and fad fhall be the wand'rer's way,
And scarce an eye, that now fo brightly beams,
Shall feaft on Carmel's palms, or Siloa's streams.
Then once again thy fairy vifion give,
Pour warmer tints, bid fresher colours live ;
It must not be; before the tempeft fly

Hope's rainbow hues, and darkness throuds the sky.
What now avail their days, with wonders bleft,
Th' unwafting fandal and unchanging veft ?
What boots it now, that Morn's ambrofial dews
Uncloying fweets, angelic food diffuse?

That balmy Eve, upon her dufky wings,
A feather'd cloud, a heav'n-fent banquet brings?
For, faint and feeble, on Rephidim's plain,
Lies, like a fcatter'd fold, the finking train;
While the flufh'd cheek and panting breaft proclaim
That fierce within them burns the thirty flame.
Around in vain they caft th' imploring eye,-
'Tis all one wafte of fand, one blaze of fky!
Oh how their fouls for Marah's waters yearn,
And ask the bitter draught they late could fpurn!
But paft are Marah's ftreams, and far away
O'er Elim's wells the verdant palm trees play:
No more their hearts are cheer'd by Freedom's fmile,
But
many a warm figh speeds, to where the Nile

Rolls

Rolls its cool waves through bow'r or fertile plain,
And Life feems lovely, though it wear a chain.

But muft they die? Will He, their Guardian Pow'r
Forfake them in affliction's darkest hour?

No! He their pray'r hath heard; at His command,
The mighty leader lifts the fov'reign wand;
Aftonifh'd Horeb feels, at ev'ry pore,

Strange waters gufh, and fprings unknown before;
Swift o'er the fands the new-born currents glide,
And breezes freshen round the rolling tide.
In fudden terror fix'd, and mute amaze,
Doubting awhile, th' exhaufted myriads gaze;
Then burfts their rapture forth; and young and old,
Crowd over crowd, like gathering furges roll'd,
Prefs to the ftream, and fend to Heav'n a cry
Of high-rais'd joy, of grateful ecstasy.

TH

LIST OF NEW PUBLICATIONS.

HE Manual of Prophecy, By the Rev. E. W. Whitaker, Rector of St. Mildred, and All-Saints, Canterbury. Price 3s. 6d.

The Hopes of the Righteous in Death. Illustrated in a Funeral Sermon, preached in the Parish Church of Horningsham. By the Rev. Francis Skurray, Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. Price 1s. 6d.

The Doctrine of the Greek Article, applied to the Criticism, and the Illustration of the New Testament. By T. F. Middleton, A. M. Rector of Tansor, in Northamptonshire, and of Bytham, in Lincolnshire. 14s.

A Letter to the Rev. John Owen, in Reply to the Brief Strictures on the Preface to Observations on the present State of the East India Company. To

which is added a Postscript, containing Remarks on a Note in the Christian Observer for De cember last. By Major Scott Waring. 3s. 6d.

A Sermon, preached at the Parish Church of Thorpe, in the county of Surrey, on the 25th of October, 1807, being the Anniversary of his Majesty's Accession to the Throne. By the Rev. E. W. Whitaker, Rector of St. Mildred's and All-Saints, Canterbury. 1s. 6d.

Sermons preached to his Congregation,at Bishop Wearmouth. By the Rev. William Paley, D. D.

An Enquiry into certain vulgar Opinions, concerning the Catholic Inhabitants and Antiquities of Ireland, in a Series of Letters from thence, addressed to a Protestant Gentleman in