entirely copied, nor wantonly deviated from the received translation. My first object has been to express the meaning of the inspired writer; and my next to preserve the simplicity of diction which distinguishes the common version. Sometimes the concise and elliptic form of the original involves a degree of obscurity: in other instances the particular structure of the passage, as found in the original, hath contributed to illustrate the meaning of it. I have accordingly in each case endeavoured to adapt my translation to the mode of clucidation respectively required; have sometimes rendered the passage very literally, and occasionally indulged in a latitude of construc

tion.'

Dr. S. was aware that the explanations which he was about to propose would not be in perfect harmony with the creeds and articles of our Church: but he recommends a revisal of them, because he is persuaded that this measure would conduce much to the interests of religion, and not less to the security and tranquillity of the establishment. He then throws himself on the candour of his readers, with a mind open to conviction, and with a sincere desire of having his errors corrected.

We shall not presume to decide how far Dr. S, has succeeded, nor to point out where he may have failed, in this undertaking but we shall venture to observe that Aoyos should have remained untranslated, since it is very doubtful whether the term employed in this and in the common version, the Word, expresses the idea which was designed to be conveyed. The usual acceptance of Aoyos is, verbum, or sermo, the Word: but, since here it can have no ordinary signification, we should have been allowed to read, "In the beginning was the Logos," &c.; and it should have been the object of a note, to ascertain the meaning of the term in this passage. Dr. S. translates it the Word, and subjoins a long commentary, of which we shall transcribe some parts:

And the Word was with God] This Word, adds the Evangelist, was with God; To or, the God Supreme: aws or, as Justin Martyr styles the Supreme Being. And therefore the WORD was not, as the Sabellians assert, the Supreme Being Himself: for if so, the language of the Evangelist would be, The Word was with himself. An absurdity equal to that, which the interpretation of the Socinians imports: who suppose the Aoy to signify the Wisdom of God.

And the Word was God] How, and in what sense the WORD was God, the authority of the Scriptnres must direct us. He is styled in the New Testament, not the first created, but goToTox the first begotten of God; and, in condescension to our ideas, the Son of God: the first term denoting his procedure from God to be different from that of a mere creature; and the latter denomination marking his peculiar affinity to the Divine essence as strongly as language will allow, and human conception reach.'

L 2

Should

Should it be suggested, that if the Logos be not the God Supreme, and yet be God, we are supposing two Gods: I will beg it to be considered, that we are not speaking of the gods of Greece and Rome, but of the God of the Hebrews. And with them I know but one God [Jehovah] self-originated, and supreme. They authorize me to style other characters of high rank and order gods: not only, as hath been observed, Beings of archangelic or angelic nature, but even eminent men. And therefore that Divine Being, who existed with the Father before the world was, I style God, because the Scriptures authorize me to do it; without presuming to ascertain the degree of his Divinity, farther than those Scriptures

ascertain it.

The gods of the Greeks and Romans were local and tutelary deities; all equal objects of worship, and all confined as to their authority and powers. But the God of the Hebrews was God over

all, supreme, and alone. If ever nation were perfect theists; it was the people of the Jews: yet other Beings, besides Jehovah, were, we find, by them styled gods. When a Jew therefore speaks of God, or a Christian, in the Hebrew sense of the word, he affixes to it different ideas from those which a Greek or Roman heathen would do: even though he write in Greek, and make use of the word Θεός. And the Greeks often using the article excellentia gratia; it is very reasonable to suppose a Jew might make use of it, to distinguish the God of gods, and Lord of lords, Jehovah.'

If, upon the whole, the doctrine contained in the five preceding verses, prefatory of St. John's History of the Life and Doctrines of Christ, signify the declaration of the world having been created by the wisdom of God; they are foreign in the extreme to the work they introduce or at best no more connected with it, than with the life of Moses, Elijah, or John himself; or any other prophet or righteous man, who may have been blessed with the divine illuminations. And if, with the disciples of Socinus, it on the other hand be said, that, applied to Christ, the doctrine savours of the tos duros in Plato's Trinity; should the Greek philosopher have picked up the same idea left by the Jews in Egypt, should Philo the Jew, a Platouist, inculcate a similar notion; I see not why the truth of the doctrine advanced under the pen of the Evangelist should be thereby invalidated, or less entitled to acceptance and belief.'

On these passages we offer no comment: willingly resigning this controversy to theologians by profession.

We shall now lay before our readers a specimen of a dif ferent kind, containing Dr. S.'s explanation of the cause of the healing properties possessed by the pool of Bethesda; John, chap. v. 2-4.

An angel at times went down into the bathing-place, and disturbed the water. I do not see why the words should be translated at certain times. If, as I conceive, the efficacy of the waters arose from the occasional eruption of sulphureous matter in the earth; the translation should rather have been, at uncertain times. But the proper version is at times in which the English idiom exactly agrees with

the

the Greek. And the most satisfactory explanation of the fact is, that there were in the earth contiguous to the bathing-place, some volcanos, from whence issued sulphureous vapours, which often threw the water into motion, and might give a medicinal quality to it: nor is it improbable, that, the nearer the time of such perturbation, the waters being then most strongly impregnated, their sanatory effect might be the more powerful. And the cause being invi sible, accustomed, as the Jews had been, to divine interferences and preternatural visitations, the effect was ascribed to the agency of an angel.'

Let this passage also speak for itself.

It is the opinion of the present critic that the words in chap. iv. 25," who is called Christ," are not those of the woman of Samaria, but of the Evangelist; and Dr. S. sup poses that she employed the Hebrew word only, Messias. As, however, the inhabitants of the town to which this woman belonged acknowlege our Lord, in verse 42, to be the Christ, is there any ground for conjecturing that the woman was less ignorant of this term than they were?

Dr. Shepherd gives no reason why St. John represents Christ as introducing many of his discourses with a Verily, Verily, while the other Evangelists describe him as using only a single Verily. Without positively asserting the genuineness of the anecdote of the woman taken in adultery, he informs us that, in his judgment, the arguments preponderate in its favour; and he offers a comment, which rather suits the tabernacle than a critical dissertation, on the circumstance of Christ's writing with his finger on the ground.

The concluding passage of St. John's Gospel has excited the scoff of the Infidel, and proved the stumbling-block of the Christian. Dr. S. has thus endeavoured to obviate the difficulty:

I do not think the world itself would contain the books that should be written.] This is generally supposed to be hyperbolical. And Wetstein on the passage hath adduced very similar striking instances of the hyperbole from two antient Jewish writers. One respects Jochanan, of whom it is said, "If all the seas were ink, and every reed was a pen, and the whole heaven and earth were parchment, and all the sons of men were writers, they would not be sufficient to write all the lessons that he composed." The other regards Eliezer, and is to this purport: "If the heavens were parchment, and all the sons of men writers, and all the trees of the forest were pens, it would not be sufficient for writing all the wisdom that he was possessed of."

The hyperbole is certainly a figure in which the Orientals greatly delight; and St. John has much indulged in their manner of writing: yet, in this instance, so immediately following that solemn asseveration of the truth of what he wrote, see verse 24, and closing the words with Amen, a word used in Scripture to enforce a truth; if

any one be dissatisfied with it, I submit to him the following interpretation.

Xwgw, besides the common acceptation, in which it is understood in the passage before us, signifies to admit, perceive, and comprehend, as well as to contain: as in Matth. xix. 11, 12. Ou WaYTES χώρισε τον λόγον τέτον. Ὁ δυνάμενος χωρείν χωρειταιω. And κόσμος sometimes signifies mankind; as chap. iii. ver. 13. God so loved the world, &c. It is sometimes put synecdochically for a certain description of men in the world; as chap. xvii. ver. 9. and 16. for the infidel and wicked men of the world: I supplicate not for the world. They are not of the world. James, iii. 6. it signifies "very much," a great deal:" The tongue is, xoopas adimas, a world of wickedness, a vast compound of wickedness. The context always points out the respective meaning of the word. If in this place it mean the terrestrial globe, the earth; the expression alludes to space, and is hyperbolical. If it sign fy the men of the world; autos xogμos, the very world, can only admit of the meaning which the proposed conjecture annexes to it.

66

A Now following such construction of the words in the passage before us, it be rendered thus: may And truly many other things are there, that Jesus did which if written every one, & autor anal x xxx, I do not think the very world [all the ingenuity of the world] χώρησαι τα γραφομενα βιβλια would comprehend the books that should be written." And it is obvious to remark how exactly the passage so rendered harmonizes with the two last verses of the 20th chapter, which are supposed to have been originally intended by the Evangelist to conclude his Gospel: xa anha, &c. "Many other miracles truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written, [being such as were necessary to be believed, and therefore lie within the comprehension of ali men] that, believing in his Name, ye may

have eternal life."

Of the pre-existence and atonement of Christ, Dr. Shepe herd is a strenuous asserter, though he does not conceive that our Saviour was equal to the Father in the Godhead.

As the publication of this work has been long delayed, subsequently to its having been printed, (as we have already mentioned, note, p. 145.) Dr. S. had sufficient opportunity for revision; of which he has availed himself by forming a long appendix, containing the correction of errors, alterations, and insertions. He has also subjoined a postscript; in which he endeavours to prove that Christ, notwithstanding his inferiority to the Father, is intitled to Divine Worship, and that the adoration of him is no violation of the first commandment. We appre hend that with this effort few will be satisfied. The strict Trinitarian will be of opinion that Dr. S. has conceded too much; and the Unitarian, will regard him as inconsistant with himself, and as endeavouring, to reconcile Christians to that which, on his own principles, must be pronounced to be Idolatry.

ART.

ART. V. Literary Leisure, or the Recreations of Solomon Saunter, Esq. 8vo. 2 Vols. 12s. Boards. Miller. 1802. A CIRCUMSTANCE attending these volumes involves us in some little embarrassment, in giving our opinion of them! but we shall endeavour to manage this difficult case to the satisfaction of the author and the public. Know, gentle reader, that Mr. Solomon Saunter has dedicated this production of his leisure hours to the Editors of the Monthly Review,' in terms of warm commendation on their literary labours: artfully adding, in reference to the general custom of making some acknowlegement for complimentary dedications, that the present of a set of the Monthly Review would be to him an invaluable acquisition, and insure his everlasting gratitude. Thus situated, the functions of our critical office must in a great measure remain inactive on the present occasion; for, though the author, with a modesty which may be either real or assumed, declares that he means to profit by our admonitions, and either to write better in future or to write no more; how can we censure where correction would appear so ungracious, or commend where praise would be so suspicious? We shall, therefore, merely introduce the author and his work to our readers, and enable them, by some extracts, to form their own judgment of its merit."

Solomon Saunter, Esq. if we may take his own word, is an idle man, a valetudinarian, and a humorist:' but, after the history of the man with the short face, our readers will not think of discovering him by this description. His miscellany is constituted precisely on the plan of former periodical papers; and he endeavours to unite the manner of the Spectator and the Adventurer, exhibiting all that variety of prose and poetry, of essays grave and humorous, critical, instructive, and entertaining, which we are accustomed to find in publications of this nature. He is also such a sly Democritus, that even his friends the Monthly Reviewers may be deceived by both his praises and his censures.

Our first quotation will exhibit the author in the office of a brother critic:

The abstract science of universal grammar is, perhaps, one of the most abstruse studies that can be pointed out. To reduce the principles of all languages to a few leading rules,-to point out wherein vernacular idioms differ, and wherein they agree, to discriminate between the nice shades of almost synonymous expressions, to lead the way to nervous precision, judicious arran angement, and all the various beauties of composition, demand a mind at once comprehensive and intelligent, an attention unwearied and acute, and a judgment well regulated and refined. Yet, when we observe the variety of opinions in the world on points which seem calculated to draw all thinking minds to one centre, we cannot help imagining such diver

L 4

sity