With my best wishes that this may be the case, I

the wrath to come.

beg leave to subscribe myself,

IMITATION OF EASTERN PROVERBS.

AMICUS.

SIR,

IF you approve of the following imitation of the eastern method of instruction, it is at your service.

PHILO HUMANICUS.

SON of man, reverence thy Maker,
By revering his image in thyself.

"Thou wast formed for government;

Let not wrong tempers or actions disgrace thy dignity.
Let not thy pride be lost in seeking undue power,
But imitate thy God in doing good to his creatures.
Let not thy ambition be for worldly dominion,
But to subdue thy passions-to govern thyself.
Let not wrath arise against a child of dust,
But against the vices that degrade mankind.

Be not thou jealous for thine own glory,

But for the happiness of society-for the glory of thy God.
As the warmth of the day is lost in the shades of night,
So, when darkness approacheth, let thine anger cease,
Seek not to revenge thyself;

Vengeance belongeth unto Jehovah :
He alone can revenge without malice;
He can punish whilst he correcteth.
Seek not to heap up riches to thyself;

Soon shall thy life pass away-then who shall possess them?

Prudence and forethought belong unto man, as form'd in the image

of God;

Let them not degenerate into anxiety, least thy peace be destroyed..
Let the streams of thy beneficence flow around thee,

Then shall thy conduct display thy Creator.

Seek not thine own welfare, but the welfare of others;

So shall the eyes of mankind be upon thee for good,

And the Dispenser of good and evil shall delight in blessing thee.
True wisdom is the daughter of experience,

Be humble, or thou shalt not embrace her.

God is omnipresent, and ordereth all things;

Commit thyself unto him in the path of duty, so shalt thou prosper.
Wherefore shouldst thou trust on man?

Man, fickle, weak, ignorant, subject unto death.

Wherefore shouldst thou tremble at man?

Man, who cannot foretell, much less hath he power to ordain.
Child of dust revere the image of God in man;

Let not thy advice, thy actions, thy thoughts, ever degrade ti.

ANSWER

то

QUESTION ON GOD'S REPENTING.

SIR,

THIS morning on looking over your number for May, I observed the question on God's repenting. Having heretofore had my mind exercised on the same, shall, in a very cursory manner set down what to me appears a solution to the question, and which hath satisfied my mind on the subject.

It hath given me much consolation that it is not reccorded of the Almighty that he ever repented of any of his gracious acts towards the sons of men, who have been enabled to cast their sole concerns on Him, who is not a man that he should lie, or the son of man, that he should repent.

True it is the Lord is sometimes said to repent of his providential or temporal favors conferred on us, when we misuse, or abuse them— hence the Lord, in many instances, acts in the distribution or removal of earthly comforts, as if he were sorry, or repented him of the kiudness shewn.

But we are not to understand repentance in JEHOVAH, as in man, to be a change of mind, but a change in conduct only. To conceive of actual repentance in Deity, in the common acceptation of the word, would be to undeify him, by reducing him to passions as a man-It therefore must be understood, when we read of repentance in the Lord, a change, or alteration in his conduct, or dispensations, relative to his providential blessings, for the mind of the Lord cannot alter, being of one mind, and none can turn him, though he wills a different procedure in the methods of his providence, not in the purposes of his grace.

May we be enabled to put our confidence in the faithfulness of that God who is faithfulness itself; and let us pray for a good understanding inall things.

BRIGHTON.

Yours, &c.

R. HUMBER.

AS I occasionally see your work, in looking over No. XXXVII. for January 1850, I met with an Extract of Robinson Crusoe's Dialogue with his man Friday concerning the Devil; taken from Dr. Kippis's life of De Foe, in his Biographia Brittannica, which its transcriber Mr. Evans, considers as "A curious anecdote respecting the doctrine of Universal, Restoration," and on which, relying on your impartiality, I beg leave to offer a few remarks, for insertion soon as convenient.

Were it not for our natural proneness to receive whatever appears congenial with our views, I should hardly suppose the insertion of that extract could have been judged favourable to the object of your Miscellany, but on the contrary, prejudical to it; on account of its incompetency to furnish any proof for its support Even in Dr. Kippis's own estimation, if not Mr. E.'s also, it is insufficient to ascertain so much as, whether De Foe's opinion coincided with the doctrine: but if it did, unless his opinion were infallible, its weight in the scale is a mere feather. The extract merely sets before us an imaginary character, - rejoicing in the sentiment; on what grounds remain to be examined: in the interim, permit me to ask, what is likely to be thought of the individual, whose religious opinion can be either, gratified or strengthned by so fictitious a testimonial? Or of that system whose advocates can so readily catch at it? for says Mr. E., "Certain it is, that the honest unsophisticated heart of Friday thought, and rejoiced in the thought, that the mercy of the Supreme Being would embrace the whole creation."

66

Many fine displays of natural sentiment (says Dr. Kippis) occur in Robinson Crusoe's man Friday." How are we to understand the Dr.? Does he only mean to say that natural sentiment is finely displayed in Friday? Or that Friday's natural sentiments themselves are fine? From the extract, the latter seems to be his opinion; to concur in which, however, some may possibly hesitate: not only because natural sentiment is' in general, insufficient to determine what is fruth; but even, in particular, on account of the figure it cuts in this very dialogue, wherein 'tis certain De Foe has finely delineated its misconception, its dissatisfaction with scripture, and its consequent aptness to imbibe fallacy; with all these circumstances in view, it is truly curious that Friday's natural sentiment should be produced in favour of any doctrine: or that, whatever praise may be due to his honesty of heart, he should be complimented with having an unsophisticated one!

Nev rtheless, it is only by this compliment, paid to Friday at the, expeace of the honesty and truth of all who differ from him, that the extract in question is moulded to serve the Universal Doctrine. It is VOL. IV.

Nn

rather strange that a gentleman of Mr. E.'s candour, should suffer such an insinuation to escape his pen, and tho' it possibly arose from that glow of heart, which sometimes carries us beyond ourselves, yet, such a manner of expression always wears an ill appearance, as tho' deficiency of argument were supplied by artifice; and, but for this compliment (of which the latter part is groundless, and the whole of it, thro' its insidious complexion, offensive) I dont know, Sir, that'I should have troubled either you or myself with these lines.

Having said, it is certain De Foe has finely delineated the misconception, &c. of natural sentiment, give me leave to justify the assertion, by appealing to the extract before us. Friday being informed by his master that God was stronger than the devil, asks, “If God much strong, much might as the devil, why God not kill the devil, so make him no more wicked?" What a specimen is here of the misconception arising from natural sentiment! for tho' the idea may be very natural in the mouth of so ignorant a character, still it is exceedingly remote from truth. By this unexpected question, his master is well represented as surprized and embarrassed, from which state, "having recoverd himself a little, he answers, "That God would at last punish the devil severely; that he is reserved for judginent and is to be cast into the bottomless pit to dwell with everlasting fire." Is not this answer truly grounded on scripture? but with this, it seems, the natural sentiment of Friday remair s dissatisfied, for, says the extract," Still, however, Friday not being satisfied, returns upon his master, repeating his words—“ Reserve at last! me no understood. . But why not kill the devil now? why not kill great ago?" For this Crusoe endeavours to account by reprying-" You may as well ask me why God does not kill you and me, when we do wicked things here that offend him; we are reserved to repent and be pardoned." Now as Crusoe confounds two such different states as that of the devils, whom God spared not, but cast down into hell to be reserved unto judgment, and that of wicked men upon earth whom God, in long suffering, does share that they may repent and be pardoned, here is the fallacy, which the natural sentiment of the ill-taught Friday, presently imbibes; and produces that mighty affectionate answer Mr. E. so much admires, "Well, well, that well; so you, I, devil, all wicked, ALL preserve, repent,-God pardon all." What therefore does this conversation exhibit, but a striking example of natural sentiment, finally becoming the dupe of sophistry? which, as it affords the instructive lesson that our religious mistakes are considerably owing to the influence of natural sentiment, was very improvidently indeed brought forward to corroborate the Universal Doctrine.

Be it moreover remarked Crusoe's answer is not only very deceptive, by blending together the case of devils in hell, with that of wicked men upon earth, but even the case of the latter is very imperfectly stated. “We are reserved to repent and be pardoned," as tho' the repentance and pardon of wicked men here, were an end absolutely certain, unto which their being reserved, is an inseparable mean. Thus every thing of future punishment (whether endless or limited). being quite lost sight of, Friday of course naturally infers," All wicked, ALL preserve, repent

-God pardon all." This inference therefore, by asserting too much, asserts just nothing.

It may now be requisite to assign some reason for De Foe's putting such an exceptionable answer into the mouth of Crusoe; and if the lesson above mentioned were not his design, there is but another which may prove satisfactory to every one, i. e. attention to character. Crusoe, in instructing the ignorant savage, is not intended to represent a minister of the gospel, but merely the plain well-disposed seaman; who, pressed and puzzled by his man's out of the way question, is doing the best he 'can: under these circumstances, and in an off-hand answer too, his falling into inaccuracy and fallacy, is as happily conceived, as the eccentric natural sentiment is, which is displayed in Friday. In this point of view De Foe shines as an author. But, to suppose (with Dr. K.) he possibly intended " covertly to insinuate that there might be a more merciful distribution of things, in the final results of divine,providence than he dared at that time openly to exhibit," is not only to suppose him an indifferent logician, but also very unfortunate in the choice of his characters-The puzzled mistaking seaman, and the ignorant Indian, so much resembling the blind leading the blind, do very ill suit such a purpose; and can stamp no validity on the sentiment.-But if, on the other hand, we for a moment imagine that he intended to expose the fallacy of the doctrine, or to satyrize both its teachers and disciples too, would it not have been difficult for him, consistent with christian charity, to have struck out a more suitable, or mortifying an expedient?-But as such a design as this would certainly prove unsatisfactory to De Foe's peculiar admirers, we will drop it, by saying in our turn, perhaps it may be going too far to assert he had any such intention.

Had these strictures been made on an anonymous piece, there are many inducements which would have made me gladly avail myself of the opportunity of letting this be anonymous too-but since the case is different, I feel it incumbent on me to act otherwise, and therefore, Sir, with all due respect to Mr. Evans and youreself, subscribe myself Yours in the gospel of truth,

FLEET, LINCOLNSHIRE.

W. BURGESS.

SIR,

QUERY ON SCARLETT'S TESTAMENT.

L OOKING over Mr. Scarlett's Testament, I observe the Greek word baptizo is uniformly translated immerse. If this is the true idea of the Greek word, would it not have been more proper to have rendered Math. iii. 11. (and similar places) " I indeed immerse you in water," instead of saying" with water?" To say, I dip you with water is not proper.

BURWASH.

Nn a

T. PAYNE