must be a special and perfect humanity; in that humanity must be revealed also the indwelling Deity; hence, a necessity of a mysterious union of the infinite and finite-divinity and humanity conjoined in one person. We have no disposition to mention the faults of a sterling work. Occasionally the speculation is more refined than valuable. There is an adventurous use of analogy in positive proof, and not merely in rebutting objections; and this is the reason why sometimes the conclusion eludes us, and we find not the solid conviction which the formal and stately march of the logic had led us to expect. Occasionally the argument lacks something of conclusiveness. For example, Book I., Chapter IX., the position is not adequately proved, that "the progress in each species is not towards another higher than itself, but to higher perfection in its own form and attributes." This is an essential point: for if progress is only by the destruction of inferior species to give place to higher, the analogy tends frightfully to the Pantheistic conclusion. "The individual perishes, the all endures," and the touching lament which Ruckert ascribes to a withering flower, becomes the universal dirge:

"Ewig ist das Ganze grün,

Nur das Einzle welkt geschwind."

We apprehend that a sceptical mind would be driven to this inference from the analogy as the author has left it, rather than to the inference intended to be reached. The argument might, perhaps, be more successful, if it were based, not on species, but on types or typical forms, ever advancing as in the case of the vertebrate skeleton, towards perfection, each in its own kind.

Not satisfactory is the author's statement of his argument on "the legal aspect and practical value of the sacrifice of Christ." He seems to teach that the sacrifice of atonement is necessary only to remove the evil which the sin of a sinner does to himself and to other created minds, failing to recognize any ground of necessity for it in the character and government of God. He distinguishes between love and that which the law requires; as if love were not itself the fulfilling of the law; and thus seems to teach that Christ's sacrifice was super-legal, because it flowed from love. Certainly the law required no suffering of Christ as a penalty; and in the sense that he endured a suffering which the law did not impose on him as a penalty for his sin, his suffering was super-legal; but not in the sense that it flowed from love. If Christ is to be spoken of as subject to law in any sense, the law requires of him perfect love; and if perfect love would lead him to the sacrifice of the cross, the law required of him that sacrifice. If not, then the Unitarian objection is valid, that Christ's sufferings for sinners cannot be reconciled with rectitude or the requirements of a just government. A further consequence is, that every self-sacrifice for others, which love prompts, is super-legal, and of the nature of atonement. We do not find recognized the essential idea that the Son of God, in the exercise of that

love, which is his own eternal character, and therefore the supreme law of the universe, did endure suffering as a substitute for the sinner, in order that thereby God's own eternal character might have its full expression and satisfaction in the redemption of sinners, and also that his character, law and government might be vindicated in the sight of all his creatures. Other statements strongly suggest the inference that the atonement must result in universal salvation, or otherwise drive us to the alternative that Christ died only for the elect. What other inference can we draw from the language that the condition of pardon to a transgressor must be "restoration of the transgressor, and compensation which will counterwork, and eventually remove the derangement from the system" (p. 182); "the evil consequences of human sin must be counteracted or worked out of the system, by the merit of transcendent holiness, because rectification of the evil is necessary to justification in law." We suppose the author, intent on his philosophical argument, which has great force, was not sufficiently careful of his statements, and failed adequately to express his own theological views.

The "Philosophy of Scepticism and Reform," is not what its title indicates. It is not, in any proper sense, a philosophy of either scepticism or reform, but simply a series of letters on various topics in respect to which the Christian views are defended against sceptics and radicals. The letters were written to a literary friend of sound learning, who had been inclined, probably without much examination, to embrace the doctrines of Theodore Parker. They were designedly written for popular reading, and are of varied merit, though bearing the stamp of the author's mind.

We find in the two last of these works occasional instances of negligence in the structure of sentences, and many inelegant and unauthorized words and phrases; e. g., the professing world, the veracity of a fact, love-death, love-sacrifice, love-action, love-throes, love-life, revealment, foundational, law-soulist.

This is a time when the old fixtures of the popular belief are loosened, and the evidence of a supernatural revelation and of the inspiration of the record of it, is passing a searching scrutiny. Religious belief is unsettled to an extent not generally appreciated. No more timely and needed work can be done than to explore modern scepticism, to re-state in their strongest forms the evidences of truth, and to confirm them by all the contributions of science and the discoveries of profound thinking. Dr. Walker has "served his generation," and deserves the gratitude of all who love the truth and seek to know it.

3.-BENGEL'S GNOMON.1

John Albert Bengel was born June, 24, 1687, at Winnenden in Würtemberg. He was educated at Stuttgart and Tübingen. In 1713 he became Preacher and Professor at the School in Denkendorf; in 1741, Counsellor and Provost at Herbrechtingen; in 1749, Prelate at Alpirsbach. He died in the sixty-sixth year of his age, December 2, 1752. In 1734 he published his celebrated Novum Testamentum Graecum cum variantibus Lectionibus, in a quarto form. He published his translation of the New Testament in 1753. He injured his literary reputation by his exposition of the Apocalypse, in 1740, and by his Ordo Temporum a Principio, etc., in 1741. A second edition of his Apparatus Criticus ad Novum Testamentum was published under the supervision of Burh, in 1763. His most renowned work is his Gnomon Novi Testamenti, published in a quarto form, in 1742. In some respects this work is unsurpassed at the present day. It is a thesaurus of terse, pithy, luminous, and sometimes admirable expositions of the words and phrases in the New Testament. It is in fact a "Gnomon," a " Pointer," an "Indicator," as on a sun-dial, of the meaning of the Evangelists and Apostles. It has been an invaluable aid to the commentators of more recent times; and we are happy to see that all our clergymen may now have access, in their mother tongue, to the work which has already instructed them through the medium of critics familiar with the original of this most suggestive Index.

The Translation is to be published in five octavo volumes. The second, fourth and fifth volumes have been announced as to be printed near the beginning of the present year, 1858. The first and third volumes are now on our table. The first contains Notes on the Gospel of Matthew, translated by Rev. James Bandinel, M. A., of Wadham College, Oxford; and the Notes on Mark's Gospel, translated by Rev. Andrew Robert Faussett, M. A., of Trinity College, Dublin. The third volume contains the Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, and on the two Epistles to the Corinthians, translated by Rev. James Bryce, M. A. The translators have performed their work with much pains-taking, and have rendered an important service to many American scholars, who are interested in critical and theological investigations. The theological system of Bengel contains many untenable positions, but is defended by him in an inoffensive and scholarly temper.

1 Gnomon of the New Testament, by John Albert Bengel. Now first translated into English. With Notes Explanatory and Illustrative. Revised and Edited by Rev. Andrew R. Faussett, M. A.. of Trinity College, Dublin. Vol. I. pp. 577, and Vol. III. pp. 437. 8vo. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 38, George Street. 1857.

4.- COMMENTARY ON THE BOOKS OF KINGS AND CHRONICLES.1

THE Commentary of Prof. Keil on the Book of Joshua was noticed in the Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. 14, pp. 447-452. The Commentary on the Books of Kings has the same general characteristics which appear in the work on Joshua. The author develops a remarkable familiarity with the objections of neological critics to the authenticity of these Books, and is successful in his vindication of the sacred record. He published in 1833 a work on the Books of Chronicles, Apologetischer Versuch über die Chronik. That work bears a close relation to this Commentary on the Books of Kings. Extracts from it have been translated by Mr. Martin, and inserted, within brackets, into his translation of Bertheau's Commentary on the Chronicles. This Commentary of Bertheau has been wisely abridged by the Translator, and occupies only the last 272 pages of the second of the volumes now under our notice. The original Commentary is a judicious and useful one, but many of its discussions are anticipated in Keil's Exposition of the Books of Kings, and the translator has foreborne to repeat them. Mr. Martin and his publishers have done a good work for the cause of sacred philology, in giving to the English public such mature and sound Commentaries, in a form so attractive to the eye, and so convenient for reference. The Books which are explained are so intimately related to each other, as to make it desirable that the expositions of them be connected in the same set of volumes.

5. DR. WORDSWORTH'S GREEK TESTAMENT.2

THE attention of the British theological scholars has of late years been turned very much to the study and elucidation of the Greek text of the New Testament. Since Dr. Bloomfield published his Greek Testament, with English Notes, which has already passed through nine editions in England, and two in America, some half-dozen English scholars have devoted themselves to the same work, and produced several editions on a similar plan, all of them respectable, and some of them of a very high order of merit. Perhaps the most elaborate work of the kind is that of Mr. Alford

1 Commentary on the Books of Kings. By Karl Friedrich Keil, D. D., Ph. D., Professor of Exegetical Theology and the Oriental Languages in the University of Dorpat. Translated by James Murphy, LL. D., Professor of Hebrew, Belfast. Supplemented by Commentary on the Books of Chronicles by Ernst Bertheau, Professor in Göttingen. Translated by James Martin, B. A., Edinburgh. Vol. I. pp. 450, aud Vol. II. pp. 463. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 38, George Street. 1857.

2 The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the original Greek, with Notes, by Chr. Wordsworth, D. D., Dean of Westminster. Part I. The Four Gospels. Part II. The Acts of the Apostles. London, Rivington, 1856 and 1857. 2 vols. 4to.

(now, by the favor of Lord Palmerston, Dean of Canterbury), which has already been noticed in the Bibliotheca Sacra, as the several volumes have been issued from the press. We are happy to learn that Mr. Alford is now engaged in a thorough revision of his whole work (which it very much needed) for a new edition, which will probably be re-published in this country.

The large and speedy sale of these works, notwithstanding their enormous price, speaks well for the state of theological scholarship in England.

The Notes of Alford are rather free in their views of inspiration, and quite liberal, democratic even, in their utterances on church government and church authority. This fact, no doubt, has had considerable influence with Dr. Wordsworth in inducing him to undertake an edition of the Greek Testament with English Notes, now in the course of publication by the Messrs. Rivington of London, the publishers of Alford.

Christopher Wordsworth, D. D., Canon of Westminster, and brother of the poet, has been long known as an author, to the literary and theological public. He early distinguished himself as a Greek scholar, and published several works, the result of his studies, and of his travels in Greece; and he has since been a voluminous writer on various theological topics.

He is now a fine-looking, venerable, amiable, scholarly old gentleman of the old school, such as one loves to see. He brings to his task a pious heart, a good will, a profound knowledge of the Greek language and literature, an extensive acquaintance with the church fathers, both Greek and Latin, an entire familiarity with the Anglican theology, a liberal reading of the modern theological criticism of Germany, and withal a most filial love and veneration for his spiritual mother, the Church of England, and a faithful devotedness to her interests. With all these qualifications he would scarcely fail to make an interesting and useful book. He now and then twattles a little, as an old gentleman may when lamenting the degeneracy of the evil times on which his gray hairs have fallen; but his Introductions and Notes are always gravely entertaining, and generally learnedly instructive. He has a profound veneration for the Scriptures, and a most implicit belief in their full and perfect inspiration. In this and some other respects he serves as a very useful supplement to Alford, and an agreeable antipode to the Germans, though in thorough faithful criticism he falls far below them both.

The characteristic of his Commentary is its frequent use of the patristic interpretations. This is a most valuable feature of the work, for though the church fathers were ignorant of many things which we know, and though they often failed in their exegesis, yet they had many things which we have not, and no modern learning can afford to dispense with their help. The human mind was as good in itself in their day as it is now; the Greek and Roman culture was in its way quite equal, to say the least, to any modern culture; the church fathers, many of them, were among the ablest men and the best scholars of their time; Christianity was new and