With due deference I would beg leave to refer Dr. Jones to his friend Mr. Bellamy's translation of the Hebrew Bible, in which, although by an oversight in the text (pardonable enough, you will say, in the stupendous undertaking of a solitary individual to translate the Bible afresh from the original) the verb is rendered began, the sense is fully proved in the corresponding note to be the same as in Levit. xxi. 9, and Ezek. xxii. 26, namely to prophane or pollute. Hence, the literal interpretation of the passage under consideration, both according to the vowel points and without them, appears to me to be, "Then he" (sc. Enos) "caused to be prophaned" (or, simply, prophaned) "in calling on the name of Jehovah ;" a sense embracing the worship of idols generally, and not that of deified mortals only, as insinuated by Dr. Jones.

With regard to the Doctor's version of the opening of the sixth chapter of Genesis, he will perhaps also pardon me if I again prefer Mr. Bellamy's translation to his, where both actually differ. It will be seen that the Doctor virtually follows Mr. B. in his version of the phrases, although his adoption of the plural Gods, does not appear to be sanctioned by a single passage in the whole Bible, and notwithstanding Mr. Bellamy's text again exhibits a mistake in the fourth verse, in printing "children of God" for "children of the God ;" but I cannot persuade myself that Dr. Jones is fortunate in his choice of the word marauders for ', which Mr. Bellamy has rendered apostates, and which in the LXX, is given by yiyávτes, i. e. earth-born. As reference only is made to gross idolatry in the preceding verses, and nothing savouring of violence or violent proceedings is intimated therein, (for the Doctor will hardly pretend that because the children of the God admired the daughters of Adam, therefore they made a violent seizure of them, a meaning by the bye which assuredly does not attach to the original mp,) I must own, I, for one, feel inclined to side with Mr. Bellamy, whose quotation of different passages, e. g. Micah vii. 8, and 2 Kings xxv. 11, appears conclusive as to the significa tion frequently given to the root D

which is that of deserting from, or apostatizing.

:נדן voce

Your reverend correspondent lays much stress on the propriety of rendering the word 11 shall remain, in which he is certainly backed by the translations which he quotes; but, even admitting that they and he are correct, which, from the general context and sense, may reasonably be doubted, there does not appear any necessity for the etymological conjectures in which he indulges, since a mere reference to the Hebrew root 17 would have sufficiently warranted his version as far as mere etymology goes. Indeed, if the reader will turn to that old standard of Hebrew literature, the Epitome Thesauri Linguæ Sanctæ Autore Sante Pagnino Lucensi, he will find the following sub "Hinc deducunt quidam illud," Gen. vi. 3, "Non erit detentus tanquam in vaginâ spiritus meus;" but I venture to submit that the sense which Dr. Jones gives to this passage, namely, that the principle of life should not remain in man, but that his days should be shortened to one hundred and twenty years, is not authorized by the narrative. Even supposing that the account of Cain's violent death, prior to the occurrences narrated in the sixth chapter of Genesis, may not bear upon the case, surely the number of deaths detailed in regular course by Moses, in the fifth or preceding chapter of Genesis, cannot warrant that legislator's putting as something new into the mouth of Jehovah the words here quoted. The number of years moreover fixed by Dr. Jones for the days of man, appears at variance with history and experience. Thus in the very same book, in which, according to the Doctor, man's days are limited to a hundred and twenty years, we are afterwards informed that several of the patriarchs of the second order, between Noah and Abraham, lived above four hundred years, and none under one hundred and forty; and whether we consult the average rate of the life of man or the utmost extent of his duration in "our degenerate day," we shall still find ourselves either below or above the Doctor's standard; for in the former case we dare hardly reckon on more than sixty or seventy years, and in

the latter we know that within a very recent period some have lived to the age of a hundred and sixty, and upwards. Hence, Sir, I apprehend that the whole of the latter clause of the third verse of the sixth chapter of Genesis, relates to something very different from the mere duration of man's temporal life.

Ere concluding these hasty remarks, I cannot refrain from slightly adverting to what Dr. Jones has said respecting angels, by which he understands a race of supernatural beings or spirits, and to whom he says, the Jewish Scriptures apply the term , sons of God. On this and other subjects of a similar nature, it might perhaps be as well to remain silent; but the Doctor and your readers will perhaps once more pardon me if I candidly own that in the numerous passages of the Old and New Testaments which I have been able to consult respecting the

of the original, or the ayyo of the Septuagint and the New Testament, I cannot find one to which any idea of a spirit or supernatural character seems to be attached. It is, in fact, one of those terms which it were to be wished might be wholly exploded from our translation of the Bible, as no where bearing in the original the meaning we now assign to it, and the retention of which only serves to throw an air of romance on what is, in the strictest parlance, the word of

God. The time, however, appears

fast approaching when this and other incongruities are likely to be disposed of, when the lover of truth and the Christian may expect to find many of those stumbling-blocks removed which have long annoyed him, and when our version of the Holy Scriptures shall be purged of anomalies and inconsistencies, which although sufficiently in unison with the style of an oriental tale, it is consolatory to know are not to be found in the original Hebrew.

publishing their Yearly Epistle. But, Sir, when I compare it with various communications which have appeared in the Monthly Repository, respecting the doctrines of that people, I am surprised at the difference between the statements of some of your correspondents, and what now seems to be the avowed creed of the Quakers. I thought it had been hinted by some, whose acquaintance with the Friends could not be doubted, that their real tenets were those of Unitarianism, that many had actually confessed it, and that we were likely ere long to see them advancing in a body as the advocates of "rational religion." With such statements, how am I to reconcile the contradiction apparent in the Yearly Epistle? (which you have no doubt correctly copied). Here they come forward, publicly acknowledging their belief in the Divinity of the blessed Saviour, “who before the world was, condescended, in order to effect our redemption, to come down from heaven, and take upon himself the nature of man." The Yearly Epistle, I believe, is considered as the voice of the whole body; but, perhaps you, Mr. Editor, can give some explanation of the enigma which has puzzled, Sir, your constant reader,

A FRIEND TO THE QUAKERS.

SIR,

minister, and that it is the best means of discovering the true sense of Scripture; that the Lord Jesus Christ is appointed the sole head and lawgiver of his church, and the only Master in religion. And I also declare, that I reject all doctrines and practices that are inconsistent with these principles, as witness my hand this third day of January, 1776.

"ANDREW Ross."

Mr. Lindsey has added, "to the honour of the parishioners of Inch, that they unanimously presented a petition, dated April 24, 1775, to the Presbytery of Stanraer, praying that their minister might be allowed to continue among them upon his own terms, and attesting his excellent, unspotted character, and faithful, laborious discharge of his duty among them."

This petition which Mr. Lindsey has given, at length, as it "stands in the minutes of the proceedings of the Presbytery," thus concludes:

They think that every church should leave its members free to search the Scriptures, and not to bind them down for ever to one sense of them. In all these points they agree most cordially with their minister, and will be happy, extremely happy, to live with him upon these terms."

Give me leave to hazard a conjecture that the "letter on subscription," inclosed in the letter "from Dr. Benson to Mr. Towgood," formed afterwards a part of the following publication.

"Some Letters, which passed between a Young Gentleman, designed for Holy Orders, and his Uncle, a Clergyman, concerning Conformity to the Church of England. With an Appendix, by the Editor." 1758. This anonymous editor I have supposed to be Dr. Benson, partly from the circumstance of my having this correspondence in a volume containing other pieces by Dr. B. and which a former possessor (who was, I believe, a Dissenting minister of Marlborough, named J. Davies) has lettered Benson's Tracts." In the Editor's Appendix, (p. 161, note,) after quoting from Whichcot, to profess and not believe, this is high dissimulation, and a horrible indignity put upon God,” he adds,

"See the very different sentiments, expressed in a Sermon, entitled, 'A Defence of the Subscriptions required in the Church of England:' preached before the University of Cambridge, on the Commencement Sunday, 1757. By W. S. Powell, D. D. Fellow of St. John's College."

The Editor professes to have received" the original letters" from 66 an intimate friend," the son of the elder brother of the nephew in the correspondence, "under an engage

ment" to conceal "the names subscribed to the letters," and not "to date them." The initials of the uncle are J. M. and those of the nephew, who is called Harry, are H. M. There are two of the letters, the first and the concluding, from the uncle, who "a few days after he wrote his ,second letter, was seized with a vio lent disorder, which soon carried him off." His nephew, who wrote six letters, "died within two years after him." That this was a real correspondence, I see no reason to doubt, though it be impossible now to ascertain the date of the letters; except that they were written after 1736, when Warburton's "Alliance between Church and State" first appeared; for the nephew (p. 94) refers to that work as the most unnatural and monstrous, most senseless, and bowelless production, that ever the brain of man was delivered of." If the notes be not by the Editor, (and he does not appear to claim them,) the letters must have been written later, for there is a note on bowelless, referring to the canons of criticism," (Can. vi. Examp. viii.) which did not appear till 1748.

Had I leisure, and were your pages less occupied, I would readily give some account of the arguments for Nonconformity contained in these letters. The nephew was evidently an Unitarian, perhaps of Dr. Clark's school, and the uncle probably an Hoadlean, who had found some liberal associates, inquiring clergymen, in his neighbourhood. One of their free conversations mentioned, (p. 52,) appears to have impressed the nephew, in whom, as Johnson says on another occasion, they kindled a flame which burned but dimly in themselves.

Should Mr. Manning know any thing of this publication, he will, I dare say, obligingly inform you.

The "answer to Powell's Sermon," (p. 324,) was, I suppose, contained in the "Serious and Free Thoughts on the present State of the Church and Religion," published in 1756, according to Mr. Manning, in his Life of Mr. Towgood. I have a pamphlet dated 1772, and entitled, A Calm and Plain Answer to the Inquiry, Why are you a Dissenter from the Church of England? By the author of the Dissenting Gentlemen's Letters to White."

Should Mr. Manning oblige your readers with any explanatory notes on the "Letters of Voltaire," I beg leave to remind him that besides what occurs at the beginning of the "Traité sur la Tolérance," all the judicial proceeding on the Calas family are detailed in the "Continuation des Causes Célèbres." (Amst. 1771.) I have only the fourth volume, which ends with the execution of Calas in March 1762, and the disposal of his family. This volume will be much

at Mr. M.'s service.

J. T. RUTT.

tion of the Divinity. What leads to ignominy ought to be feared much more than what conducts to poverty. He who abandons fortune for justice, ought to be looked upon as the best citizen; but those whom their violent passions hurry on to evil, men, women, citizens, simple inhabitants, ought to be admonished to think of the gods, and often to bear in mind the severe justice they exercise against the guilty: let them have constantly before their eyes the hour of death, that fatal hour which awaits us all, that hour when the recollection of faults brings remorse, and the vain repentance of not having made all our actions subservient to equity.

"It therefore behoves all men to conduct themselves at each moment of their lives as if this moment were the last; but if an evil genius excites them to crime, let them take refuge at the foot of the altars; let them pray to heaven to remove far from them this evil genius; let them especially throw themselves into the arms of worthy people, whose counsels will bring them back to virtue by representing to them the goodness of God and his vengeance."

There is nothing in all antiquity

REFLECTIONS MADE IN A COURSE

OF GENERAL READING.

No. CCCCVI.

but sublime passage, dictated by reason and virtue, stripped of enthusiasm, and of those gigantic figures which good sense rejects.-Voltaire, Histoire Générale.

No. CCCCVII. Corruptions of Christianity the Armoury of Unbelief.

The Israelites went down to the Philistines to sharpen every man his ax, (1 Samuel xiii. 20,) and unbelievers in Protestant countries are wont to resort to Rome to whet their sneers at the Christian religion. Almost any deistical book would furnish examples of this artifice. The following is from Gibbon, (Decline and Fall, 8vo. Vol. VIII. p. 123, note 14,) who was always pleased when he could escape from the gravity of his historical text to play the buffoon or worse in his notes." Gregory, the Roman, supposes that the Lombards adored a she-goat, which they were accustomed to sacrifice to the gods of their fathers. I know but of one religion in which the God and the victim are the same."