It may be made intelligible. It has been, and there is one fact that proves it. It is the fact that all men understand or misunderstand the proof texts concerning doctrine alike. There is none, among all the translations, exclusively Calvinistic, or Arminian, or Unitarian. In all versions, as the reviewer says, all have their respective proof-texts, and all the texts relied on by each are the same in all versions. A Calvinistic proof-text in our version, is a Calvinistic proof-text in every other version; which shows that whoever may be wrong, the Bible is correctly translated. What then do these difficulties, so much vaunted by Unitarians, prove? They prove that no translation is absolutely perfect in every possible respect. But what if it be so that no translation is exact? Does it follow that every translation is not so far exact as to communicate, in a manner obvious to popular apprehension, the entice mind of the Spirit on the subject of doctrine? A writer may spell badly, and write ungrammatically, and yet be understood. There may be thirty thousand various readings, and not one of them obscure the flood of light which is poured on all the doctrines of the Bible. It may not be difficult perhaps, to show that, on some passages, clouds and darkness rest to this day. But does the eclipse of one star hide the light of all the rest, and blot out the sun? What if some points of chronology are matters of doubtful disputation-do these obscure the law of God, or the revealed account of human depravity, or the doctrine of regeneration, or the nature and necessity of repentance and faith? Some of the prophecies are obscure, as they were designed to be, until the hand of time should lift the veil. But what has prophetical obscurity to do with the doctrines of the Bible, whose object it is to instruct, and which are of no use, exco as they are made intelligible? And if the changes through which the Bi

ble has passed, have thrown obscurity and doubt on some passages which relate to doctrine, are all the proof-texts, or all the doctrines, to be rejected as incompetent witnesses, and thrown into a dungeon? If some of the figures which are employed to teach doctrine, are not intelligible from local allusions, is the light of all figures, therefore, put under a bushel? And what if the light of every metaphor in the Bible were put out--is the Bible all metaphor? Are not the doctrines still revealed so plainly in literal language, as to render the belief of them a duty, and the disbelief of them a sin? And as to prejudice, I hope the reviewer will not advocate the maxim that a man may avail himself of his own crime, or

that the Bible is not obvious to honest minds, because it presents a darkened page to those that hate the light, neither come to the light, lest their deeds should be reproved. It was for the blindness of prejudice, that the Jews were blinded more, and for that darkness of the understanding which was caused by the heart, that they were hardened more, and given over to believe a lie. And as to controversies and different opinions, it remains to be proved that these have resulted from any obscurity of the Bible concerning doctrine, and have not resulted rather from pride, and passion, and selfishness, and ignorance, and enmity against God. The Bible may be a plain book to any man who will do the will of God; while to the wicked, who will do wickedly, it may remain a sealed book. I am aware that just opinions are made neither better nor more true by authority, and yet the concurrence of human opinion upon a given subject, increases the presumptive evidence of its truth. In this view I quote with satisfaction the testimony of Locke. Speaking of the Bible, he calls it a collection of writings designed by God for the instruction of the illiterate bulk of

mankind in the way of salvation, and therefore generally, and ia necessary points, to be understood in the plain, direct meaning of the words and phrases, such as they may be supposed to have had in the mouths of the speakers who used them. The Christian Examiner for May and June 1824, in an article entitled "Notes on the Bible," says, "Had the copies of the New Testament which have come down to us, in their transmisstion through successive centuries, and versions from one languge to another, suffered changes of such a nature as to render it uncertain what were the facts and events originally narrated, what were the principles of the Christian institution, what were the real character and actions of its fo under, and what the doctrine he promulgated, then indeed must we resign our confidence in the sacred text; for then it would be impossible to learn from it, with any degree of certainty, what Christianity originally was.* Now if all this, too, is indecent and irreverent, and of course untrue, and if such changes have attended the transmission of the Bible to us, as that what seems to the common people the direct and obvious import of the text, is not the real import which was present to the minds of the inspired writers, then I beg leave to ask the reviewer, what the common people are to do? They cannot read the Bible in the original languages, and they cannot find its import in the translation, according to the import of language in common use, the only language which they can understand. How then are they to come to the knowledge of the truth? Shall they abandon the maxim, that the Bible is the religion of Protestants, and believe as HIS HOLINESS and the CHURCH believe? This would be to turn back the

*I have heard it suggested that this article was written by the reviewer himself-but of the fact I have no evidence.

hour hand of time to the dark ages, and pour contempt upon the discoveries in mental philosophy and biblical learning, which have blessed these latter days. Shall they study, then, evangelical commentators ? These, alas, through ignorance and prejudice, do but "lead to bewilder, and dazzle to blind;" and the Quakers, and the Baptists, and the Antinomians, are all in the same condemnation, relying on prooftexts, which, taken from their connexion, seem to favour their views. What then shall the common people do? They must read Unitarian commentators ;-for after all these appalling difficulties from changes of customs, and theological prepossessions, and technical phrases, there is a meaning on the sacred pages which is direct and obvious, not only to the inspired writers, but to the minds of unprejudiced readers even now-a meaning which Unitarians, being happily without prejudice, do see, while the rest of the world sit in darkness. All those passages which teach the humanity of Christ have somehow come down to us unobscured, through all the perils of time, and "in a language remarkably different from the original." Indeed, having cleared the breakers of orthodoxy and gotten into still water, the reviewer himself seems to regard the Bible as a very plain book, whose real import is obtained by a strict adherence to the direct and obvious meaning of the terms as they would and must be understood by plain unlettered men. If he were called upon to give a comparative view of Unitarianism and Calvinism, there are no points on which he would insist more in showing the decided superiority of the former, than on its strict adherence to the plain meaning of the plain parts of the Scriptures, and on the ease with which the whole system can be understood and comprehended by men of all capacities. There are, he thinks, but a few passages which occasion

any difficulty, and these, by the light of plainer passages, by the tenor of the gospel, the leading objects of the dispensation, and the researches of scholars, are in most cases" explained "in a manner perfectly satisfactory." Nay so entirely have all the clouds been dissipated, which lowered just now upon the inspired page, and with such effulgence has the sun broke out upon it, that the whole anti-calvinistic or Unitarian system, can be understood and comprehended by men of all capacities. Indeed the texts are so plain, which contradict all the leading doctrines of Calvinism, that the whole constitution and complexion of the Bible, CAN convey NO OTHER meaning to a plain unlettered man, than is irreconcilably opposed to the fundamental principles of Calvinism. Really, one might as well reason with a pendulum as with such a writer, never in one place, but first in one extreme and then in the other. I hope however he will stick to his last opinion, viz. that the direct and obvious meaning of the Bible, as it is understood by plain unlettered men, is the true meaning; and then he will only have to account for the facts by which I have endeavoured to prove, that the doctrines of the evangelical system are in accordance with the direct and obvious import of the sacred text, as it is understood by plain unlettered men, and for his own concessions, that the predominant import which in all ages actually has been received from the sacred text, is not the Unitarian but the Evangelical import.

The facts which I wish him to explain, are, the confession of learn ed infidels, that the evangelical is the true doctrinal import of the BiVOL. VII.-No. 3.

ble, corroborated by the confession of learned Unitarians afterthey have stripped of inspired infallibility the opinions and reasonings of prophets and apostles. I desire him also to account for the fact that the Papists, who in doctrine have been, as a body, anti-calvinistic, should have been so bitter in their opposition to the circulation of the Bible, as teaching only to mislead the common people, if the whole constitution and complexion of the moral parts of the Bible can convey no other meaning to a plain unlettered man than one irreconcilably opposed to the fundamental principles of Calvinism; and how the refor mers should have regarded the translation and spread of "this decidedly anti-calvinistic volume," as the sword of the Spirit in putting to flight the armies of the aliens. But especially would I request the assistance of the reviewer, to enable me to comprehend how a book so decidedly Unitarian, that the whole system can with ease be understood by men of all capacities, and no other meaning can be understood by a plain unlettered man than one irreconcilably opposed to Calvinism-how such a book should have actually been understood to teach the evangelical system of doctrine by a vast majority of mankind who have read the Bible, and should not have been understood to teach the Unitarian system by persons enough at any time or in any nation, to lay a foundation for comparing the practical tendency of the two systems; for he says "unfortunately Unitarianism has never yet prevailed in any country and therefore this comparison cannot be made."

21

To be continued.

Measures have been taken for the establishment of a Methodist Episcopal College, within the bounds of the Virginia Conference.

A committee of the Legislature of Maine has reported in favour of an additional grant of $3000 per ann. to Bowdoin College, for the support of a new Professorship of Modern Languages, and the erection of a chapel.

The first commencement at Columbian College was held at Washington on the 15th of December. The degree of A. B. was conferred on three young gentlemen.

The Baron de Wrangel has been engaged for several years with a large party, in exploring and surveying the northern coasts of Siberia, on the ice, in ascertaining whether Asia and America are separated by water, and in endeavouring to reach the North pole on the ice. The first two objects he is said to have completely accomplished. It is now considered certain, that the two continents are entirely separate. His attempt to reach the North pole on sledges drawn by dogs, failed, in consequence of their meeting with an open sea. In March of 1822, the party left Niji-Kolymsk, and directed their course N. E. upon the ice. After travelling

twenty-two days, a distance of two hundred and thirty-five miles, they met with the open sea in N. lat. 72° 3′ and finding it impossible to proceed further Northward, returned, after a journey on the ice of forty-six days without any kind of shelter, where the thermometer never rose above fifteen degrees below freezing, and frequently fell to twentyfour degrees (of Reaumer it is supposed) below freezing. In an attempt to reach an island which was said to lie N. E. of the Cape of Chalagskoi, they encountered a tempest which lasted many days, and broke up the ice, even to the southward of the party, so that they were several days on a floating mass, surrounded by immense heaps of broken ice, in total want of provisions, and exposed to the greatest dangers before they were able to reach the land. The return of the party, and the details of their expedition, are impatiently expected in Europe.-Bull. Univ. July.

It appears by a letter from Hodgson, the friend of the unfortunate Belzoni, in which he gives an account of the death of the latter, that this celebrated traveller, in consequence of all the information he has received in Benin, has changed his opinion concerning the course of the Niger. Hodgson considers it as proved, that the Niger does not enter the Nile, but enters the Atlantic ocean by many mouths, forming a large Delta, between Rio Formoso, or Benin, the Western branch; and Rio del Rey, the Eastern. This supposed delta is on the Western, or rather the Southern coast of Africa, about one thousand miles East of Cape Mesurado.

**

According to Capt. Basil Hall, there are in Chili many hundred mines of copper, a much smaller number of silver, and not one fiftieth of the number of gold. This is favourable to the wealth of Chili, if we may trust to the maxim every where received in South America, and said to be uniformly confirmed by experience, that a mine of copper is a treasure, a mine of silver is ruin.' tolerable, but a mine of gold is certain

Boukaria, the centre of the power