ears are open unto their prayers; but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil. . . . . . And be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts.

Here again the Apostle does but clothe his sentiments and injunctions in words of old Scripture, as a preacher of the present day would do. (Comp. Ps. xxxiv. 12-16; Is. viii. 12, 13.)

III. 18-20.

Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit; by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.

Our English translation of these verses I take to convey an altogether erroneous idea. As they stand in the printed editions of the Greek, the sentence is very incompact, and its import, accordingly, obscure. It has probably suffered violence in transcription, — a fact which is indicated by some variety of reading in the manuscripts. Taking the text as it is printed, by "the spirits in prison (ev þvλakî), which sometime were disobedient," I understand the disobedient spirits once imprisoned in the bondage of iniquity (comp. Isaiah xlii. 7), or (preferably) the spirits, once disobedient, now in safety. (Comp. épíλage, "saved," 2 Pet. ii. 5.) For "when the long-suffering of God waited," I propose, by an easy and perfectly allowable change (%, Te for oтe), to read "which also the long-suffering of God awaited." We shall then understand the Apostle as saying, that Christ, by that holy spirit which dwelt in him, and which was but quickened into higher life when he died, had gone forth [during his earthly ministry] and

ἐφύλαξε,

ΤΕ

preached to benighted minds, once disobedient, now saved; which also [that is, the like of which, preaching efficacious to men's salvation] God's long-suffering mercy was awaiting, all the time that, in Noah's days, that ark was in preparation, wherein eventually eight persons were saved in the flood of water; which also [that is, water, applied in baptism] doth also now save us, &c.

And

But this explanation of a difficult passage, right or wrong, is something aside from my purpose. The only question presented by it, in connection with the argument I now am treating, is, whether Peter could thus refer to Noah and his ark, unless he believed the account of them in Genesis to be historically true. upon this point I have nothing to add to what I have already said in different places, of the perfect rhetorical and logical legitimacy of allusions of this kind to fabulous narrations. (Comp. above, pp. 80, 113, 297.) In saying that, in the ministry of Jesus, God's longsuffering mercy waited for men to betake themselves. to the ark of refuge, just as he put off the flood all the time that the ark was building, Peter presented a lively image to readers to whom the narrative of that proceeding was familiar; but by no recognized rules of the interpretation of language can he be understood to vouch for the narrative as true.

IV. 8.

Above all things have fervent charity among yourselves; for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

In the original use of the words here quoted, their meaning appears from the antithesis in the context (Prov. x. 12) to have been, that charity conceals a neighbor's faults. It is not clear, nor is it material, whether the Apostle meant to repeat them in this

sense, or with the different import that charity is a virtue so excellent that it will atone for, and, as it were, blot out, faults in its possessor.

IV. 18, V. 5.

If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

Quotations from the Book of Proverbs (xi. 31, iii. 34, the former, however, not from the Hebrew, but from the Septuagint) are here naturally introduced, after the manner common with all writers.

SECTION XII.

FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN.

III. 11, 12.

We should love one another; not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

Am I asked, whether St. John, exhorting his disciples to mutual love, could refer to the story of Cain (Gen. iv. 8) unless he regarded it as true history? I ask in return, whether I am precluded from advising a young friend to adopt for himself the choice of Hercules, unless I am ready to maintain the truth of the story in the Memorabilia; or whether I may not enforce my exhortation to join effort to prayer, by referring to the tale of Hercules and the Wagoner, without making myself responsible for the existence of Hercules and the wagoner as real persons. (See above, pp. 80, 113, 297, 309; also, below, p. 341.)

PART III.

BOOKS OF DISPUTED AUTHENTICITY.

SECTION I..

EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

THE New Testament books on which I have remarked, with others which contain no reference to the Old Testament calling for comment (viz. the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon, and the First Epistle to the Thessalonians), complete the list of those whose authenticity was unquestioned in the primitive Church (óμoλoyovμéva). The others found in the received collection were anciently called spurious or disputed (νόθα or ἀντιλεγομένα). These names are taken from Eusebius, who states the distinction in different places. ("Hist. Eccles.," Lib. II. Cap. 23, III. 3, 25, 31, VI. 20.)

In my remarks on the acknowledged books, it has been my aim to show, that in no case presented by them does Jesus, or any Apostle or Evangelist, attribute to the Old Testament, or to any passage in it, any sense different from that which in my work on the Old Testament I have set forth as the true one. The case stands thus. Confining our attention to the Old Testament, and applying to it the established rules for interpreting language, we conclude that it, and its several parts, convey such and such a meaning. But the question arises, whether Jesus and his Apostles have ascribed to it any meaning different from this, on

any of the numerous occasions on which they have referred to it. I am persuaded that they have not; and this opinion I have endeavored to maintain in the comments contained in the previous pages of this volume.

But I cannot say the same of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. That composition contains numerous allegorical interpretations of the Old Testament; interpretations, in my opinion, altogether incorrect, and proceeding on an exegetical theory indefensible, unsound, and delusive. (See "Lectures," &c., Vol. II. pp. 333-352.)

This fact would exceedingly perplex me, if I supposed the Epistle to the Hebrews to be the work of Paul, or of some other divinely authorized expounder of the Christian religion. But I do not so suppose. The common notion of its having been written by Paul, I take to be not only unsupported by evidence, but to be opposed by a convincing weight of evidence. To present an outline of the argument on this subject is all that is consistent with my limits or my plan.

The evidence in respect to the authorship of this book, as of others, is of two kinds; external and internal.

Under the head of the external evidence, champions of the Pauline origin of the work have found a topic of argument in another book of the New Testament collection. A recent writer says: "The first evidence to be adduced on this subject, though of a nature somewhat indirect and uncertain, is worthy of our close attention, on the ground of its antiquity and authority. It is the testimony of the Apostle Peter, who, in his Second Epistle (iii. 14-16), writes as follows: Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in