them, and to them only; that the phrase, "he that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved," has especial reference to their character and situation; and in reply to the question, What is this baptism? he answers, "I believe, a change of character; doubt dyed into certainty, and fear into courage; a mind thoroughly imbued with a conviction of the resurrection of their Lord; the answer of a good conscience toward God, and such a submission to the authority of Jesus as would lead them to say, in the very face of death, We will obey God rather than men.' In Sect. 3, the author puts the question, Why did the disciples and apostles use water-baptism, if it formed no part of their commission or of the gospel dispensation? And replies, that he be lieves it arose from a desire to rival John's disciples; and that it was contrary to the will of Jesus for them so to act." At any rate, he concludes that their having baptized with water is no proof of having a command to do so. He then proceeds to consider the various cases of baptism mentioned in the Acts.-We shall only repeat his observation, that we may arise from these cursory remarks with very different impressions; or if we venture an additional observation, it would be, that his attempts to separate the use of water from the term baptize are sometimes overstrained, arising from his notion of the term baptize, which, as our note will shew, is at least a doubtful, if not a false guide. In Sect. 4, the author is more successful in shewing that in the apostolic writings the terms baptism and to baptize, have a sense distinct from the use of water. There are remarks upon some passages of Scripture, which, independently of the controversy, are useful as laying open to the general reader of the Bible their meaning and force, particularly upon 1 Pet. iii. 2, aud Heb. vi. 2. Sect. 5, is occupied with some miscellaneous passages of Scripture and conclusion, to which we refer our readers. The aim of the conclusion seems to be to shew, if we understand it, that there is a particular body of believers in Christ, with whom a mau must connect himself in order to be capable of true Christian obedience, and in order to be truly baptized unto the name of the Lord Jesus. Whether there is such a body, and where that body is to be found, except in the pious, sincere, and faithful, of all Christian sects, are great questions. The author is here certainly upon very slippery ground, and here we leave him with our good wishes, and the committal of him to that Master "to whom every man standeth or falleth." ART. III.—Miss Macauley's Address to the King, Legislature, and Population, of the United Kingdom, on the Subject of an Improved System of Mental Cultivation. J. Mardon, 105, Finsbury. MISS MACAULEY is one of those beings who have the discernment to see that "there's something rotten in the state of Denmark," something amiss among a people incessantly forming new plaus (each better than the former) for the public good, yet abounding more in crime and punishment every year than the last; but, we fear, she has not found out the remedy. It is really almost comic, if it were not a distressing proof of inconsistency, to find, after she has informed us that her plair is one of " selfexamination and self-correction, of turuing the expanding mind upon its own resources," and of "exciting the active powers of the mind," to read the beginning of the following first mental exercise, "intended for the use of children from five to eleven years of age." "What is your name? Auswer. M. or N. Who made you? A. God. Who is God? A. A Supreme Being, the Creator and Governor of the universe, and the benevolent Parent of all human kind. Have you any other parent besides God? A. Yes! I am the offspring of earthly parents. From my father and mother I derive my birth, under the ordinance of Almighty God and I am fearfully and wonderfully made," &c. And this is to develop the mind, to excite its active powers, to turn it upou its own resources! Spirit of Pestalozzi, hear and marvel! Again, "You say that God is a Supreme Being; what do you mean by a Supreme Being? A. Supreme means" (mind, reader, words must be explained by words; there is no other way) "almighty, allwise, all good, all-powerful, the Creator of all things, the Preserver of all things, and superior to all things." We are compelled to separate from Miss Macauley on the very threshold of the school-room door, because we think that she is beginning precisely upon the plan by which every desirable result will be prevented. There is no exercise for the heart or mind in questions like these. It is a mere explaining of terms by other terms, not one of which, probably, would present a clear image to the mind of a child. Let Miss Macauley take her catechumen and by private conversation find out what is already passing in its mind. It is no easy task; but affection, and desire to be right, will do much; then may she proceed to call forth what needs assistance, and help the little thinker to clear up its own ideas. Hitherto she has mistaken her own mental activity for that of the child-the old, the original siu of educators. We are always disposed to sympathize with those who wish to serve their fellow-creatures, and it is mortifying to see them thus defeating their own plans. MR. WOOD's little volume will be of great value to Sunday-School Teachers, and eventually, it may be hoped, to Sunday Scholars also. The Prayers are more simple, and every way better adapted to the purpose, than those in any similar collection which we have seen. The concluding Hints to Teachers respecting books, may also prove useful. The greatest objection to them is, that they are nearly all expensive; and not only is this undesirable as far as respects the probable pecuniary means of a school, but also as respects the effect upon the children. Even among the little people whose rank in life may entitle them to luxuries of this kind, it is much to be regretted that the taste for literary extravagancies has been allowed to reach such a height. A value for mere ornament is thus early fostered, and the more homely volume is despised. We entirely differ with Mr. Wood as to the idea of the books he has mentioned not being "extravagant in price." Let him compare them, as to the quantity of matter, with any published by Houlston, 65, Paternoster Row, or Oliphant, at Edinburgh, or still more by Westley and Davis, and he will be convinced of this. It is possible, indeed, that the binding and printing of the books in Mr. W.'s list may render it impossible to afford them cheaper but we object to the idea of leading a child to value the book for its outward advantages. In a library, indeed, more expensive books must necessarily be purchased, and the teachers ought not to be fettered in the choice of those which will best enable them to perform their duty to the children; but for the use of the pupils in school, aud for prizes, (if prizes are given,) we could wish the scale of expense, on every account, to be lower. In Mr. Wood's list, we do not observe that that admirable American Tale, James Talbot, reprinted. by the Christian Tract Society, has met with particular notice. "The Suspected Boy," price 4d., by the same author, is to be had at Mr. Houlston's. "Christmas Day, or the Friends," in two parts, (6d. each, by the author of Devotional Exercises,) may also be recommended. And for the library, we are rather surprised not to meet with "Principle and Practice," by the same author. wards. Mr. Wood approves of them, We now come to the subject of Rebut objects to the system of giving marks or tickets for what is done every Sunday. Yet he perceives the difficulty of ensuring punctual attendance, and thinks, if any exception be made to his censure of the marking or ticketing system, it ought to be in favour of marks for regularity in coming to school. It may not be amiss to mention a plan which has been adopted in several large SundaySchools, to meet the difficulty here adverted to, and with complete success. The object has been totally separated from the consideration of conduct in every respect, and has been effected simply by the establishment of a little Savings' Bank among the children. Every child pays a halfpenny on the Sunday, to which every five Sundays the teacher adds a halfpenny more. The money is of course the property of the child, who has the liberty of drawing it out once a quarter (perhaps once in half a year would be better); but if, except for some very satisfactory reason, the scholar fails in bringing the halfpenny two successive Sundays, his place and money for that quarter are forfeited, and he cannot be re-admitted except by a written order from the minister or superintendent of the school. This leaves the question of other re wards perfectly open, and upon this we will not now enter. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE. SIR, On the Logos. To the Editor. THE respectful letter of your correspondent, in the Number for November last, on the Introduction to St. John's Gospel, demands from me an attentive reply. Since his letter appeared, I have carefully reviewed the interpretation, which appears to me generally correct; and I now submit the following paper in the full belief that it will be received candidly by your correspondent, having no higher wish, than that whether by the adoption or rejection of this interpretation, the proposal of it may serve to promote the interests of truth. THE REVIEWER OF UPHAM The introduction to the Gospel of John appears to me one of those portions of Holy Scripture in which we have escaped the truth by attempting to dive too deep. I apprehend that the principal word, about which so much difficulty has been felt, or so much mystery been imagined, is one which, from the frequency of its occurrence in the New Testament, and our consequent familiarity with its usage, might have been expected to be plain and obvious. Many attempts have been made to explain this remarkable passage of Scripture from foreign sources. We cannot have forgotten the admission of Austin, and of Horsley in modern times, that an acquaintance with the philosophy of Plato is necessary to the right understanding of this part of St. John's Gospel: "I never understood the Proem till read Plato." Others, among whom is Michaëlis, have conceived that certain erroneous notions of contemporaries were referred to by the Evangelist with a view to refutation; on which I repeat the sentiment of Lardner, that it would have been beneath our Evangelist to have incorporated a refutation of such * Introduction to the N. T., Vol. III. 286. "As soon as this dissertation was published (viz. a Dissertation on the Opinions of the Sect which took its name from John the Baptist) the obscurity in which St. John's Gospel had been involved, was at once dissipated"! opinions in a life of his Master; and I Now, upon au examination of the term Aoyos, in a Lexicon to the N. T., we find the word explained by several terms, such as the following word, speech, narrative, report, precept, testimony, oracle, promise, threatening, doctrine, &c., in which variety of expression, however, it is observable, that one general idea pervades the whole; and that that one idea comes as near as may be to the idea conveyed by our term word; an indication of which may be found in the fact, that whereas Schleusuer gives all these senses to Ayes, and more than these, our English Version attempts to express the whole by the one term word. This may shew the propriety of retaining a term in the English translation, the extensive signification of which seems well to correspond with the original. But it is obvious that the circumstances in which this term Aoyog is very frequently employed, will greatly limit its signification: e. g. when our Saviour says, in his parable of the Sower, Matt. xiii., "When tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended; he also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful;" we never experience the least difficulty in understanding his meaning. Our attention is not directed to a word in the abstract, or one of the constituent parts of a sentence, which is, however, its primitive sense; but we understand some one of the derivative senses following easily from the primary sense, suggested by the circumstances in which the speaker stood, and finding its explanation in other parts of the New Testament. What is the Christian Volume itself, but a record of the word? And who that reads this inestimable volume, but must be familiar with such phrases as the word of truth, the word of Christ, the word of life, the word of God, the word of his grace?- these being only fuller expressions for that quoted from Matt. xiii., the word simply; that instruction which was communicated by God through Jesus Christ; grace, truth, life, and some other words expressing a leading feature of that instruction, and by a common figure in language being placed for the whole. This may be admitted to be a common, perhaps the prevailing sense of the expression in the N. T. But the term Ayes, or Word, may be less restricted. Before the truths of Christianity were proclaimed, "God had spoken to the fathers by the prophets ;"* consequently, "the word of God came" to these, in agreement with the frequent expression at the opening of the prophecies, e. g. Jer. i. 2, 4; Ezek. i. 3; Hos. i. 1; Joel i. 1, &c., &c. But, even prior to the dispensation of Moses, or the communications to the patriarchs, God uttered his word in the creation: "God said, Let there be light; and there was light." + "By the word (hy) of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the hosts of them by the breath of his mouth." We seem to be travelling a pretty safe road when we take the writings of any author to explain himself. Now, there seems strong internal evidence to shew that the beginning of the First Epistle of John contains a similar train of thought to that which we find in the exordium of his Gospel. These two productions of one author were, at any rate, written at no great distance of time from each other, and not improbably were written very near each other. Remarkable similarity of expression may be found in them, and this is particularly true of the first paragraphs. They have in common the words upxn, beginning, heyos, word, wn, life; and the phrase προς τον Θεον, with the Deity, bears too close a resemblance to pos Toy Пarepa, with the Father, to be overlooked. Let us then consider the translation and interpretation of the introductory verses of the First Epistle of John, which appear to furnish some peculiar clue to the meaning: "That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we have looked upon, and in relation to the word of life, (for the our hands have handled, [not of, but] life has been manifested, and we have seen and bear witness, and shew to you that eternal life which was with the Father, and has been manifested to us; that which we have seen and heard,) we declare unto you." This passage would, I think, other considerations apart, appear particularly easy; and the following remarks occur in connexion with it. "We 1. The Apostle does not say, have seen, we have handled the word of life," as our version, from the unfortuuate rendering of me, has seemed to countenance, but " that which we have seen," &c., in relation to, concerning, the word of life; and it is singular that this error was not observed by so accurate a reasoner as the late Rev. T. Kenrick, in whose Exposition, Vol. II. p. 209, 1st ed., will be found an argument derived from this misinterpretation, in favour of the opinion that Aoyos, the Word, denotes the person of Jesus Christ. But other translators and expositors have fallen into the same mistake. 2. The expression eternal life which occurs in this passage, is one which occurs often in this Apostle's writings, and invariably signifies, so far as I am aware, not a person, but the distinguishing principle of the Christian religion, or that promised gift which the Father authorized the Sou to bestow on those who obey him: e. g. John vi. 68; 1 John ii. 25. 3. As to the word apxn, that is of so indefinite a nature in itself, that its sense must evidently be taken from the connexion in which it is used. I apprehend that in this Epistle itself it is used in opposite senses: thus, while ch. ii. 7, 24, iii. 11, and 2 John ver. 6, seem clearly to shew that the first preaching, or early reception, of the gospel is intended, with which may be compared John xv. 27, xvi. 4;-another passage, 1 John iii. 8, (with which may be compared John viii. 44,) clearly refers to an early part of the world's existence, a sense which is corroborated by Paul's use of the word, 2 Thess. ii. 13. Perhaps 2 Pet. iii. 4 renders the remoter sense probable. These instances, combined with Gen. i. 1, make, I think, the balance of probability go down in favour of agxy in the sense of the beginning of the world. 4. The phrase, was with the Father, is, I apprehend, sufficiently obvious, from a comparison of it with those passages of St. Paul which speak of the mystery of, or doctrine according to, godliness, which was hidden from ages, and generations, laid up with God, but subsequently manifested. Having proceeded thus far, we can scarcely doubt that we are in possession of the true meaning of the Apostle. He and his fellow-labourers announced to the believers the fulfilment of that gracious intention which had been formed by the Divine Being at the beginning of time, which had been promised by him, speaking through the prophets, but which was bestowed through Jesus Christ. This promise is eternal life, the assurance of a state of eternal happiness to all the obedieut, and the most distinct information concerning the mode of obtaining it. Of the fulfilment of this promise they, the apostles, had received the most palpable evidence; for they had heard the Father's testimony at the baptism and the transfiguration; they had seen the miracles which declared him to be the Son of God; they had beheld with their eyes, and their hands had handled, the risen Jesus-all these being evidences in relation to the doctrine of eternal life which "God, that cannot lie, had promised." What can be more reasonable, then, than that, with this interpretation impressed on the mind, I should proceed to explain a passage, written by the same author, bearing so many marks of similarity, assigning to the words and phrases occurring there also the ideas which we have gleaned from the first paragraph of the Epistle, viz. 1. Eternal life, (which is the distinguishing part of that word which was communicated to the world by Jesus Christ,) existed in the beginning. 2. It had been laid up with the Father. 3. It was at length manifested to the world by a human being, Jesus, the Christ. Now, these will be found prominent ideas in the proem to St. Johu's Gospel, agreeably to the following succinct exposition. Ver. 1-5, " In the beginning," i. e. from the foundation of the world, (Gen. i. 1, Prov. viii. 23,) existed the Word, or scheme of religious truth, in agreement with the scriptural expression, (Eph. i. 4,) "God chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world," and this Word was laid up with God, intended to be made known, but as yet uncommunicated. And this Word was divine, divine in its nature, divine in its origin. All things were, or came to pass, through it. All the succeeding dispensations of religion proceeded from this source, and were formed after that prototype existing in the Divine mind. In it was contained the principle of life, eternal life, (1 John i. 2,) the sum and substance of Divine Revelation, and this life was designed to be the spiritual illumination of mankind. The light shone amid the darkness of surrounding idolatry and heathen superstition, and the darkness did not wholly eclipse it. Several of the holy men of old discerned the promises afar off, and discovered their hope of the glory which should be revealed. Ver. 6-9. A man received a commission from the Supreme Being, whose name was John. The design of his mission was to bear testimony to the approach of that light which should enlighten the Gentiles, as well as constitute the glory of Israel. He was not himself the medium of diffusing that light, but was to act only as the morning star which ushers in the bright luminary of day. The true light was that which, when introduced, irradiated with its rays the whole world of mankind, consisting of Gentiles and Jews, and not one nation only. Ver. 10-14. (God)† was in the world, the world was made by his almighty power, all nations of men on the face of the earth were by him constituted, yet the world, generally, knew him not. He came to his own, to that portion of the world I do not conjecture any other reading here, but I suppose eos without the article to be here used adjectively, and to be equivalent to θειος. + The Greek scholar knows that no nominative is expressed in the Original. It cannot be the last-mentioned, viz. the light, because pws is neuter. Dr. Priestley (Harm.) inserts God at the beginning of the 11th verse. It is better, I think, to do this at the beginning of the 10th. |