authority, that abstract reasoning is lost upon him. To enable him to fully understand the force of an à priori argument, he would need to have his mind reconstituted, or at least re-educated.

His whole work is a piece of special pleading in support of a foregone conclusion. Mr. Barker is simply one of the theological gnats that are always ready to sting any intruder on their special domain of dogmatic theology.

J. W. JACKSON.

INSPIRATION.

"A RECTOR" at pp. 463-5 of your January number writes in a reverential spirit. It is on that very account with the more pain that I see him profess his belief that our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles were แ entirely uuacquainted with Hebrew." It was not so with the Lord after his ascension, for he spoke to St. Paul "in the Hebrew tongue," (Acts xxvi. 14.) Most of your readers will, I think, believe that it could not have been so with him at the opening of his ministry, when he read the passage of the Scriptures for the day from Isaiah in the synagogue of Nazareth (Luke iv. 17-21). Is it likely that it was so even at the age of twelve, when he disputed with the doctors in the temple; or was it the case with the apostles, on whom the gift of tongues was bestowed after the Lord's ascension? Let the matter be put in the form of a syllogism, thus:

If any one sent from God, or commissioned by God, to communicate a knowledge of his will to men, used the LXX. translation in quoting the Old Testament, or made any variation from the exact sense of the Hebrew, it is a proof that he did not understand Hebrew.

The Lord Jesus Christ, and several of his apostles, the one being sent by the Father and the other by him, as he was sent by the Father, to communicate, etc., did so use, etc., and quote, etc.

Therefore it is a proof that they did not understand Hebrew.

The fallacy lies in the major premiss. There may have been, and there were, reasons for their practice in the fact, that the Greek language was to be in the main that of the New Testament, shewing that this was best suited on the whole to the times and to the future of the Church; and if the Lord and his apostles often departed from the exact sense of the Hebrew in passages they quoted from the Old Testament, their variations have, by the very fact of their having made them, as much the sanction of the Holy Ghost as the original Hebrew. Indeed, the Lord himself said: "The word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me" (John xiv. 25). "I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak." And as for the apostles, they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, as much as the Prophets who were before them. So, then, whether they quote the Old Testa

ment exactly according to the Hebrew, or whether they quote it inexactly, or whether they do not quote it at all, their words are equally to be received.

It is with similar regret that I find your correspondent writing, in the same letter: "If the writers of the New Testament regarded the writings of the Old as verbally inspired, in the sense in which inspiration is claimed for them by writers of what is commonly termed the evangelical school of theology, it would seem to follow as a natural and direct consequence, that they would have been most careful upon all occasions to quote the ipsissima verba of the original, if not in the original language itself, at least to adopt such a version thereof as should secure to their readers a faithful and perfect representation and reflection of that divine original."

Let him apply the same reasoning to the departure which Moses made, in relating the Fourth Commandment, as he is recorded to have done in Deut. v., from the words of the same commandment as written by the finger of God on the tables, and as given in Ex. xx., and he will find that he is very much using, without being aware of it, the unhappy argument of Bishop Colenso on this subject.

EDWARD BILEY.

CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

It

THE Book of Judges in its chronological statements does not present in my opinion any serious difficulty to our accepting the period of four hundred and eighty years, as stated in 1 Kings vi. 1, to have elapsed between the exodus and the building of Solomon's temple. seems quite apparent, from some passages in that book, that all the events related in it did not take place in consecutive years, but that some of them were happening at the same period in different portions of the territories of the twelve tribes. It is the statement of St. Paul in Acts xiii. 20, where he says that the period of the Judges lasted for almost four hundred and fifty years, that seems at first sight to be irreconcilable with the chronology of 1 Kings. My own belief is that the apostle does not speak of consecutive years, but only means to say that the several periods mentioned in Judges would, when added together, amount to the time he mentions, though the actual period in consecutive years was not so great. Suppose that a pestilence raged in Scotland for ten years, commencing from 1697 and ending in 1706, and that a famine afflicted the southern portions of Britain for a period of five years, commencing in the year 1694, those two events would in consecutive years embrace a period of thirteen years, but if added together might be said to embrace one of fifteen. It is in this latter way I sup

pose St. Paul to speak in Acts xiii. It seems to me, however, a very unusual mode of reckoning time, and I should therefore feel much obliged if any of your correspondents could furnish me with examples of the kind drawn from profane writers. H. C.

NEW SERIES.-VOL. IX., NO. XVII.

NOTICES OF BOOKS.

Jesus Christ: His Times, Life, and Work.

By E. DE PRESSENSE.

London: Jackson, Walford, and Hodder. ALL the world knows or may guess that we owe the production of this volume as it is, and at this time, to the stimulus supplied by M. Renan's Vie de Jesus. The instincts of men are the same in theology and biblical criticism as they are in other domains. If an inundation threatens, all hands go to work, and every accessible material is pressed into a service of temporary, though of vital importance, and the danger may be averted: but for the future solid and massive ramparts are required, and they are an after thought and an after work. The volume of M. Renan bore proudly down upon the cherished beliefs of millions, and many men rushed forward to render its advance innocuous. The slight and often feeble but courageous efforts which repelled the immediate shock substantially averted the present danger, but it was felt that recourse must be had to something more solid and effectual. Hence works of greater magnitude, and in particular, the one before us.

Owing to the shortness of the time at our immediate disposal, we have not been able to go thoroughly into the merits of a volume which is worthy of the highest commendation. It first appeared, and very recently in French, but this translation was made from the proof sheets, as they passed through the press. The translator is a lady, Miss Annie Harwood, and she appears to have executed her task in a most praiseworthy manner. We may suggest in passing that revision is called for in respect to the forms of some foreign names and Greek words, and a few other details which do not in the least affect the substance of the work. As for the author, Dr. de Pressensé, he is confessedly one of the ablest living Protestant writers of France on the side of moderate orthodoxy. To rare natural powers, highly disciplined, he unites a firm faith in the verities of our holy religion, untiring industry and zeal, great literary skill, and an extraordinary amount of learning. All these endowments have been put into requisition in the production of a truly admirable book, the plan of which is singularly philosophical and comprehensive, and the execution most thorough and effective. Of all the publications which have been called forth by M. Renan's remarkable volume, this is the most complete and satisfactory we have seen. We shall be surprised if it does not command a large circulation, and we are quite sure that even those who sympathize with M. Renan's particular opinions will be compelled to respect a cause which has so redoubtable an advocate. It is something marvellous that a man should be able to accumulate so diversified a mass of facts, illustrations, and arguments, in so short a time as this work must have been composed in. We shall endeavour to examine it more at length and to state some of its leading features in a subsequent notice, but in the meantime we have much pleasure in welcoming it, and cordially recommending it to the consideration of our readers and the intelligent Christian public.

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Exodus, with a new Translation. By JAMES G. MURPHY, LL.D., I.C.D. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark.

SOME time ago Dr. Murphy issued a volume on the Book of Genesis. That book contained much admirable matter, along with sundry things with which we could not concur. The one now before us we like better; and we have found in it so much that we like, that we can speak well of it as a very serviceable and meritorious production. The author has not only given us a new translation, and introduced many valuable critical notes, but he has collected a multitude of observations and illustrations of an exceedingly useful and appropriate character. The analysis and explanation of the historical as well as legal portions will generally be found both clear and satisfactory; and although the work emanates from a scholar who uses freely his knowledge of Hebrew, it is manifest that all readers of ordinary intelligence may use it without difficulty. Good expositions of Exodus are by no means plentiful in our language, but the enterprizing publishers of this volume are contributing handsomely towards the supply of the deficiency. The very useful work of Keil and Delitzsch, which preceded this, we have heretofore commended, and now we are happy to speak well of another volume from the same house. The orderly and straight onward course of Dr. Murphy contrasts favourably with the flitting and fragmentary mode of Dr. Colenso. We are pleased with the work, and we cheer

fully recommend it.

Every-day Scripture Difficulties. Part II. A Series of Readings on the Gospels according to St. Luke and St. John. By J. E. PRESCOTT, M.A. London: Longmans.

IN 1863 Mr. Prescott gave us a capital volume, with the same general title as the present, elucidative of a number of texts in the first and second Gospels; he has now carried on his plan with the two last Gospels. The book is one of a class which we hold in high estimation, and we believe it to be very trustworthy and meritorious. An examination of the text shews that the author is of the right school, that he carefully investigates and clearly realizes the points at issue, and that he generally sees his way to a consistent solution. That he is laborious and conscientious is even more plainly indicated by the numerous and learned foot notes, in which references will be found to a host of authorities. The spirit of the book is like its aim, very commendable. We do not, of course, pledge ourselves to every conclusion which the learned author has arrived at, but we are sure that his researches will be found useful and acceptable to many whose functions call them to expound the Gospels, while active duties and other causes forbid them to go thoroughly into many interesting topics, upon which they have to pronounce an opinion. Having expressed ourselves so favourably of this volume, we need do no more than express the hope that its author will be induced to continue his useful labours.

The Legends and Theories of the Buddhists, compared with History and Science: with introductory notices of the life and system of Gotama Buddha. By R. SPENCE HARDY. London: Williams

and Norgate.

BUDDHISM is a great problem, and every book upon the subject by a competent authority ought to be gladly welcomed. That Mr. Hardy is an authority is undeniable; his Eastern Monachism and his Manual of Buddhism are two most useful and curious books, abounding in rare and instructive matter. The work before us may contain some things which are to be found in the two volumes we have mentioned, but it includes much additional matter, and many views and observations which will help an ordinary reader to understand better what Buddhism really is. The information supplied upon the legends and principles of the most remarkable of existing sects is such as could have been contributed only by one who has access to original sources. Now we all know that the original sources are inaccessible to all except a very few among the inhabitants of Europe, and this fact should make us prize the more volumes such as the one in our hands. It is manifest that a much larger work could have been written, but for most readers we suppose the volume will be all the more acceptable for being kept within its actual limits. There are some among us who promulgate false and mischievous views about Buddhism, and whether for their correction or for placing the real facts of the case before the public mind this neat and compendious book will be invaluable.

Household Theology; a handbook of Religious information respecting the Holy Bible, the Prayer Book, the Church, the Ministry, Divine Worship, the Creeds, etc., etc. By the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLunt. Second Edition, London: Rivingtons.

WE are very glad to see a second cheaper and revised issue of a welldesigned manual, the nature and aims of which are sufficiently indicated by its title. The book is to some extent apologetic, but it is principally valuable for the multitudinous items of information which it contains on theological and ecclesiastical matters. In the former edition we ob

served some slight errors, and even in this there are a few statements which require emendation; two or three of these we will mention by way of example. At page 96 there is a table of "ministerial titles used in the New Testament" manifestly intended to shew what names Christian ministers there receive. Our greatest critics tells us that a minister of the Gospel is nowhere called a priest (Hiereus) in the New Testament: but Mr. Blunt includes this in his list, with a reference to Heb. iii. 1. On turning to the passage, we find that it designates the Lord Jesus, and calls him an Archiereus or High-priest, a point which should be cleared up. At page 195 George Fox the Quaker is called 66 a cobbler:" is this correct? On the same page the Mormonites are said to have been introduced into this country in 1850; this is wrong; they were here certainly about 1835. At page 237 Joseph Smith the