the oppressor live in prosperity, and die in ease? The knowledge of a future state of righteous retribution, would have enabled the poet to solve this difficulty; but to that knowledge he appears, so far as we can judge from his work, to have been a stranger. In the speech attributed to the Almighty, we have the only answer which he thought could be given to these difficult inquiries. God is infinitely wise, and of irresistible power; man cannot fathom his counsels, nor resist his will. It is vain to contend with God, or to seek to know why he treats us as he does. He will give no account of his ways to mortals; if he did, they could not comprehend him. The duty of man, therefore, is, to submit to all his dispensations; to learn from them lessons of piety and virtue; and to acknowledge, that in all his works, and in all his ways, God is holy, and just, and good." In the 1st chap. verse 6, we find, "Now, on a certain day, the Sons of God went to present themselves before Jehovah, and the Satan also went amongst them." On the term "Sons of God," Mr. W. remarks, "most probably, the angels or ministers of the divine pleasure, by whom the orders of the Supreme Ruler of the world were supposed to be executed. This is not to be considered as history, but as a figurative representation of the course of the divine government, borrowed from the custom observed by the patriarchs in the exercise of their authority in their respective families, aided by their elder children and servants; or by kings in the government of their kingdom, aided by the advice and ministry of their council." And on the designation "Satan:"-" He appears amongst the Sons of God, and is evidently one of them. It seems to have been his special office to visit the subjects of the divine government to take notice of their conduct to report, from time to time, in the grand council of God, what he observed, and to accuse those who were guilty. The name, Satan, is not a translation of the original Hebrew word, but only a representation of it in English letters. The original word, is thought by some to be a noun formed from that which, in the next verse, is rendered going about.' If closely translated, therefore, it would be the goer about, and would denote the office which this minister, in the heavenly court, was supposed to hold, namely, that of general inspector. As one important part of his duty, was to discover and to denounce delinquents, the title, in process of time, might come to be

equivalent to the accuser and the adversary. This, indeed, may be its first signification, as it is by many understood to be, and that which it is intended to bear in this place." The following translation exhibits the beauty and energy of the original. Chap. xi. 7-9:

The deep things of God canst thou find out?
Canst thou to perfection find out the Almighty?
The height of the heavens! what canst thou do?
Deeper than the grave! what canst thou know?
Longer than the earth is its measure,

And wider than the sea.

Upon which Mr. W. remarks, "What canst thou do?' i.e. in discovering the excellencies of the divine nature, and the mysteries of the divine government. As the heavens are too high for thee to ascend to them, so the perfect knowledge of the Almighty is unattainable by thee." "The grave-rather the lower world. The deepest parts under the earth. It is constantly opposed, in the Scriptures, to the heavens, which denote the highest parts above the earth. The knowledge of the counsels and operations of the Almighty, then, cannot be fully obtained by man: if it could, the wisdom, the justice, and the mercy of his dealings would be seen and acknowledged." And in his reflections on the passage, "Though, by the most painful and laborious research, we cannot find out the Almighty,' we cannot but know his will concerning us. Let it be our first care to do his will, and the day will arrive, when we shall escape from this scene of ignorance, imperfection, and darkness, and be introduced into the realms of light, and life, and joy; where' we shall no longer see as in a glass darkly, but face to face, and know even as we are known." Chap. xiv. 10:

But man dieth, and is laid along,

Yea, man expireth, and where is he?
Waters flow away from a lake,

And a river is dried up and exhausted,

So man lieth down and riseth not again;

Till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake,

Nor shall they be roused from their sleep.

If a man die, shall he live again?

All the days of my appointed service, I will wait
Till my relief come.

Thou wilt call, and I shall answer thee,

The work of thy hands thou wilt desire.

“Till the heavens be no more:' i. e. not at all; never. Such is the meaning which this and similar phrases bear in Scripture. Compare Ps. lxxxix. 29, 36, 37; lxxii. 7, 17; Deut. xi. 21; Jer. xxxi. 35–37; see also, Baruch i. 11. 'Live

again. Once dead, he knew he was dead for ever; when once admitted to the unseen world, it were vain to hope that he should be permitted to return. In the form of a

question, he undoubtedly expresses the firm conviction of his mind, that when any one dies, his life, as to the present scene at least, is for ever extinct. This is evident both from the connection in which the language stands, and from various express declarations of Job, that no such renovation of his being was expected by him. The cloud, saith he, is dissolved and vanisheth away; so he that goeth down to the grave, shall not come up. He shall return no more to his house, nor shall his place own him again any more.' 'Till my relief shall come.' By appointed

service, he means his present suffering condition; and by relief, restoration to health, and ease, and prosperity. These terms are figurative, being borrowed from military usages, according to which, troops, after being for some time employed in active service, are at length recalled, and their place occupied by fresh forces. Reflecting upon the inevitable consequence of death, Job recalls the wish he had expressed (13th verse), and resolves to bear, as patiently as he could, the calamities that had befallen him, till it should please God to remove them, and vindicate his integrity. Earnestly desire:' i. e. Thou wilt be anxious to do me justice, and to rescue me from my afflictions. He changes the metaphor in this verse; using the terms call and answer in a judicial sense: the former, denoting the action of bringing the complaint; the latter, the part of the defendant in replying to it."

The xix. chap. 23-27, which, has in some way or other, been compelled to afford an apparent aid to the doctrine of the Supreme Deity of Christ, Mr. W. thus translates: Oh that now my words were written! Oh that they were inscribed in a book! That with an iron style and with lead, For ever on a rock they were engraven! For I know that my Avenger liveth,

And that hereafter he will rise up over the dust.

And after my skin hath been thus torn,

Still from my flesh I shall see God.

Whom I shall behold on my side,

And my eyes shall see, but not estranged from me.

My Avenger; or my vindicator, my deliverer, my patron. The word in the original, is that which, in the Mosaic law, is often rendered the blood avenger, and also, kinsman, or next of kin. It denotes one whose duty it was, to see that

justice was in all cases done to his nearest relation: if that relation were slain, that his death was avenged on the murderer; if he were compelled to sell himself into slavery, or to part with his inheritance, that, if possible, both his person and his possessions were redeemed; and if any injustice were done to him, that he was succoured, and the oppressor punished. Job, therefore, is to be understood as expressing the firm conviction of his mind, that God would appear for him in this character; that he would clearly establish his integrity; and put to shame, and punish as they deserved, those who had so falsely accused him either of open or of secret transgressions. "Hereafter;' at length; what I now predict, will, in the end, certainly take place. The whole passage,' observes Mr. Heath, seems to be an anticipation of what is to follow at the conclusion of the poem, and is, indeed, a summary of it.' 'From my flesh;' from my body, yet living. I shall see God;' God will manifest himself to me; He will not hide himself from me, as he now does. 'On my side;' propitious to me, defending and vindicating me."

These quotations will enable our readers to form some idea of the value of the work which Mr. Wellbeloved has now in hand; and we are not without a hope, that some may be induced to possess themselves of the original, by which, we can assure them, their knowledge and their piety can hardly fail to be promoted. G. C. S.

"On Communion with Unbelievers, a Discourse, delivered in the Unitarian Chapel, Mosley-Street, Manchester, on Sunday, March 30, 1828, by John James Tayler, B.A.”

THE Occasion of the publication of this very excellent sermon, may be learned from the words of the writer, as stated in the preface.

"In the Manchester Chronicle of April 5th, the following singular article appeared: Unitarianism and Deism. From a highly respectable correspondent. We give the substance of a sermon, delivered on Sunday last, pursuant to advertisement, at the Unitarian Chapel in MosleyStreet, on communion with unbelievers (Deut. vi). It is rather singular, that such a discourse should have been founded upon such a text; but it is still more extraordinary, that a professed Christian minister should be the apologist of Infidelity, and plead for fellowship and communion with those who totally reject Divine Revelation. Unitarianism and Deism, are, if not the same thing, at least associated together in principle and affection.' An attempt [continues Mr. Tayler] is then made, to substantiate this very uncandid charge, by a most inaccurate representation of the discourse itself; instances of which I have pointed out

in the following pages, as well as more fully in a letter addressed to the Editor of the Chronicle this day. That the public may judge with what candour and fairness my statements have been represented, I have published the whole discourse, to speak for itself. Whatever may be thought of the soundness of the principle which I have recommended in the behaviour of Christians towards serious and moral Deists, I am convinced, that no person who peruses the following pages in a candid spirit, will regard the author of them in the obnoxious light of an apologist for Infi delity; but must discern in them, indubitable traces of a mind deeply impressed itself with the truth and divine authority of the Christian religion, and earnestly solicitous for the communication of its hopes and consolations to unbelievers." And, in the conclusion of the preface, "I cannot disguise my own firm persuasion, that, if the spirit which I have here (in the discourse) recommended, were more generally cultivated-if Christians would cease to proscribe and anathematize each other, and would conduct themselves with gentleness and candour towards those whose unbelief should be an object of compassion rather than of hostility-it would prove the most effectual of all methods, to accelerate the approach of that blessed period, which every good man desires to behold, when those sheep that are now lost and astray, and, unhappily, are not of his fold, shall hear the voice of the good Shepherd, and there shall be one fold and one Shepherd-even Jesus Christ.

Fully participating in these amiable sentiments, we strongly recommend the perusal of the discourse to our readers.

www

"Bible Controversy in Ireland. Infallibility not possible; [Mental] Error not culpable, &c.-Hunter, London."

THOSE Who doubt the propriety or beneficial tendency of public debate on controverted questions in theology, will, we hope, have their doubts set at rest, by the effects which have followed the discussion between Messrs. Pope and Maguire at Dublin. It cannot be denied, that that discussion excited considerable attention at the time, and that its good effects have been carried on and improved to the best of purposes-free inquiry and the inculcation of righteousness and truth; first, by the admirable treatise of Dr. Drummond on the Trinity, which we had the pleasure of noticing, Vol. I. p. 459-65, and now, in the powerful work whose title we have placed at the head of this article. The work consists of nine letters, the greater number of which contain replies to the question, "Have I a right, in matters of Religion, to form a conclusion by the exercise of my own reason?" This question, involving as it does the doctrine of the Infallibility of the Church, and the right of individual judgment, is most ably and powerfully argued. We shall enter more fully into the merits of this valuable publication in our next number. All we can now do, is warmly to recommend it to our readers. We can quote but one passage:—