were admitted by an outward sign to a covenant with God: but this sign will not avail those, who violate the covenant, ch. ii. 25— 29. 66 Obj. 3. According to this doctrine of St. Paul, the Jews have no advantages above the Gentiles, which is manifestly false." Answer. They still have advantages, for to them were committed the oracles of God; but their privileges do not extend so far, that God should overlook their sins, which the Scripture earnestly condemns even in Jews, ch. iii. 1-19. 4. "They had the Levitical law, and sacrifices." Answer. Hence is no remission, but only the knowledge of sin, ch. iii. 20. 5. From the preceding argument St. Paul infers that Jews and Gentiles must be justified by the same means, namely, without the Levitical law, through faith in Christ: and in opposition to the imaginary advantages of the Jews, he states the declaration of Zechariah, that God is not the God of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles, ch. iii. 21-31. 6. As the whole blessing was promised to those, who were the faithful descendants of Abraham, whom both Scripture and the Jews. call his children, he proves his former assertion from the example of Abraham; who was an idolater before his call, but was declared just by God, on account of his faith, long before his circumcision, Hence St. Paul takes occasion to explain the nature, and the fruits. of faith, ch. iv. I.—v. II. 6 7. He proceeds to prove from the equity of God, that the Jews had no advantages above the Gentiles, in 'respect to justification. Both Jews and Gentiles had forfeited life and immortality, through the common father of the human race, whom they themselves had not chosen as their representative. If therefore it was the will of God to restore immortality by a new spiritual head of a covenant, which was Christ, it was equitable that Jews and Gentiles should have an equal share in the advantages to be derived from this new representative of the human race, ch. v. 12-21. 8. He shews, that the doctrine, of justification, as he had stated it, lays us under the strictest obligations to holiness, ch. vi. 1—23. 9. He shews that since the death of Christ we are no longer concerned with the law of Moses. For our justification arises from our appearing in the sight of God, as if we were actually dead with Christ on account of our sins: but the law of Moses was not given to the dead. On this occasion he evinces at large, that the preceding consideration does not affect the eternal power of God over us, and that while we are under the law of Moses, we become perpetually subject to death, even for sins of inadvertency, ch. vii. 1-25. 10. From these premises he concludes, that all those, and those only, who are united with Christ, and for the sake of this union live not according to the flesh, are free from the condemnation of the law, and have an undoubted right to eternal life, ch. viii. 1 -17. 1. Having described the happiness of all such persons, he is aware that the Jews, who expected temporal blessings, would object to him, that the Christians, notwithstanding what he had said, still endured many sufferings in this world. This objection he obviates, ch. viii. 18-39 12. He shews, that God is not the less true and faithful, because he does not justify, but rather rejects and punishes the Jews, who would not believe in the Messiah, ch. ix. x. xi. His discourse on this subject is arranged as follows. A. The introduction, in which he displays the utmost caution, ch. ix. 1-5. B. The dissertation itself, which consists of three principal parts. a). St. Paul shews that the promises of God were never made to all the posterity of Abraham: that God always reserved to himself the power of choosing those sons of Abraham, whom for Abraham's sake he intended to bless, and of punishing the wicked sons of Abraham: and that in respect to temporal hap piness or misery, even their good or ill conduct did not determine his choice. Thus Ishmael, Esau, the Israelites in the desert in the time of Moses, and the greater part of that nation in the time of Isaiah, were rejected and made a sacrifice of his justice, ch. ix. 6—29. b). He shews, that God had reason to reject most of the Jews then living, because they would not believe in the Messiah, though the Gospel had been plainly preached to them, ch. ix, 30.-X. 21. c). Yet God rejected not all his people, but was still fulfilling his promises on many thousand natural descendants of Abraham, who believed in the Messiah, and at a future period would fulfil them upon more, since all Israel would be converted, ch. xi. II−32. C. The conclusion, in which the apostle expresses his admiration of the wise counsels of God, ch. xi. 33-36. 13. From the doctrines hitherto laid down, and particularly from this, that God has in his mercy accepted the Gentiles, he argues that the Romans should consecrate and offer themselves wholly to God. This leads him to mention in particular some Christian duties, ch, xii. 14. He exhorts them to be subject to the magistrates, ch. xiii. 1-7. 15. He recommends brotherly love, ver. 8-10. 16. He commands them to abstain from those vices, which the heathens considered as matters indifferent, ver. 11-14. 17. He exhorts the Jews and Gentiles in the Christian church to brotherly unity, ch. xiv. 1.-xv. 3. The Christian community in Rome appears to have been divided into parties, who purposely assembled in separate places of worship. But on this subject I shall say more, in my notes to this epistle. He concludes, with an apology for having ventured to admonish the Romans, whom he had not converted; with an account of his intended journey to Jerusalem; and with salutations to those persons, whom he intended to recommend to public notice, ch. xv. 14. xvi. 27. In respect to the salutations, it will be necessary to make the following remark. When St. Paul desires a Christian community to salute certain members in his name, he thereby insinuates that he esteems those persons as his particular friends, and recommends them to the church. In the Epistle to the Romans this appears more clearly than in any other of St. Paul's Epistles: for he not only bestows particular commendations ou most of those, whom he salutes, but in the midst of his salutations he introduces a warning against those, whose society was to be avoided, ch. xvi. 17-20. Hence we see, that not even the salutations in St. Paul's Epistles were unworthy of a divine inspiration, or the direction of the Holy Spirit.' Vol. iv. p. 102. The seventeenth chapter of this work consists of general remarks on some of the epistles written by St. Paul during his imprisonment at Rome; and on the imprisonment itself. These apply to the epistles which he addressed, and at the same time dispatched, to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon; after which the question is examined, whether St. Paul were twice a prisoner in that city? and in the affirmative case, whether these epistles were written in his former or latter confinement? Having briefly mentioned what is known concerning Philemon, in considering the Epistle to the Colossians, Michaëlis describes the situation of Colossæ, and the circumstances of the Christian community there, as introductory to a view of the contents, design, and occasion of the epistle itself. To this subjoining a notice of the epistle for which St. Paul desires the Colossians (ch. iv. v. 16.) to send from Laodicea, and which is determined to have been one written by himself, our author passes on to the Epistle to the Ephesians, examines whether this epistle were really addressed to them, or to the Laodiceans; and concludes it probable, that it was not confined to any distinct community, but intended for the use of the Ephesians, Laodiceans, and some other churches in Asia Minor. The situation of the Christian community at Ephesus is also stated, and the contents and style of this circular epistle remarked on. The city of Philippi, and the Christian community in it, become requisite objects of notice in elucidating the Epistle to the Philippians, which was written by St. Paul during his first imprisonment at Rome, whilst in expectation of a speedy release, and, as Michaëlis thinks probable, about the beginning of the year 65. The order of our author now brings him to the Second Epistle to Timothy, and points to the question whence this epistle was written, and whether whilst St. Paul were a prisoner at Rome the first or second time. To a general illustration of its contents, an investigation succeeds, to determine whether St. Paul were an impostor, an enthusiast, or a messenger from heaven; this is closed by observations to ascertain from what trade the Apostle obtained his subsistence; which the familiar language of comedy explains to have been a maker of mechanical instruments - Τες δε ΜΗΧΑΝΟΠΟΙΟΥΣ και ΣΚΗΝΟΠΟΙΟΥΣ ἡ παλαια sinupdia wiqμase. POLLUX. The Epistle to the Hebrews, being a subject of much importance, is introduced under some general remarks, accompanied by a statement of questions to be examined. Of these, the first proposed is, Whether what we call the Epistle to the Hebrews be properly an epistle or a dissertation? and, if an epistle, Why it appears without the accustomed opening? Following this with the inquiry, Is the Epistle to the Hebrews quoted by St. Peter, 2. iii. 15, 16? our author proceeds to show that it was written for the use of the Christians in Jerusalem and Palestine, adducing at the same time the opinions of other writers, on the question, Who the Hebrews were to whom it was sent? The situation of the persons addressed in it is then set forth, and the time when and place where it was written, considered; as also its original language, which, according to the most ancient tradition, was the Hebrew. Arguments in support of this opinion are produced, and enforced by a new one, drawn from the quotations out of the Old Testament which this epistle contains. The arguments alleged in favour of its having been written in Greek are in the next place confuted; and after an examination, whether the Greek epistle be an accurate translation of the original, remarks on the Greek style are offered. Pursuing the research as to the author, and, particularly, whether it were of St. Paul's writing, the opinion of the ancients on this subject is brought forward; the internal marks or characters in the epistle itself, whence any inference may be drawn, either for or against St. Paul's being the writer, are specified; the opinion entertained by some of the ancients, that Barnabas was the author, is examined; and, having adverted to the canonical authority of this epistle, the whole discussion is closed with this short sketch of its contents. • The contents of this epistle I have represented at large in my commentary on it; at present therefore I shall only give a short sketch of them. In the first place, the author endeavours to answer objections, which the Jews had made to the Christian religion, and which had occasioned the Jewish proselytes to waver in the faith. He then points out the impending abolition of the Levitical law, and its incfficacy even to the Jews: which subject is treated in a more clear and comprehensive manner, than in any other book of the New Testament. The chief arguments are taken from Psalm cx. which relates to the priest after the order of Melchisedek, and from the prophecy of Jeremiah relative to a New Covenant. These arguments are produced in the seventh and eighth chapters, but the subject is still continued in the following chapters. Here it may be remarked, that St. Paul, though he never permitted the Levitical law to be imposed on the heathen converts to Christianity, and undoubtedly considered it as unnecessary, still per mitted the Jews to continue the exercise of it: he likewise observed it himself, and in order to convince the Jews that he did not preach apostacy from the law, he made a Nazarite vow, and accompanied it with the necessary offerings at Jerusalem. The open declaration therefore made in the Epistle to the Hebrews, relative to the aboli tion of the Levitical law, is to be ascribed perhaps to the circumstance, that it was written not long before the destruction of the temple, when the Jewish sacrifices ceased.' Vol. iv. P. 268. (To be continued.) ART. X. A Philosophical Treatise on the Passions. By T. Cogan, M.D. 8vo. 8s. 6d. Boards. Cadell and Davies. WE have never yet seen this subject examined in a manner which we consider to be philosophical; and the treatise before us scarcely meets the views which we have proposed for its due investigation. We cannot at present explain, with sufficient accuracy, our own opinions; but we will, nevertheless, briefly notice them, and point out what we consider to be the sources of former errors. To begin with the latter, we may remark, that much inconvenience has arisen from the metaphorical language employed. Affections, emotions, and passions, have not been clearly distinguished; nor has it occurred to any author, that they are, in reality, degrees only of the same influence on the brain or the mind. Emotions and passions also implying active energies, cannot be reconciled with some impressions of a similar nature; such, for example, as fear, which depresses; terror, which annihilates for a time all the functions; or grief, that kills. In short, the passions have been considered as distinct affections; and in some measure they are so. They are occasioned by the sensible impressions, which excite ideas, or by the associations, or reminiscence, which recalls them; but they are mental actions, interposed between the idea and volition, influencing the latter apparently as distinct causes. Thus the passionate man, in his violent fury, is seemingly not agitated by the cause, which, to others, may appear trifling, but by the passion of anger excited by the idea; the jealous man, not by the actions or the words of his mistress, but by the suspicions which these excite. We have called these apparently distinct causes,' to make our theory clearer, and to explain the step between the idea and the emotion. In reality, however, we do not think them distinct, but that the whole may be resolved into the principle of associa tion. If this view be correct, we would consider affections, emotions, and passions, as different degrees of mental affection; excited by sensible ideas, or by the recollection of their impressions; and as proceeding from undulations and vibrations of an easy pleasant nature, to more active and violent agitations. But what shall we say of the depressing passions? We can |