plained with great care and defended with great anxiety. And these sentiments let us remember, have been relinquished, not on the authority of a more careful examination of the sacred scriptures; but, so far as I have had an opportunity of observing, solely on the authority of metaphysical speculations on the nature of the human mind and its aptitude for being influenced by what it believes.

We now proceed to examine the sentiments of the respectable writers on whose disquisitions I take the liberty of animadverting. The subject naturally branches itself into two parts, that which respects the terms in which it is expressed, and that which respects the operation of the mind,-in other words, the philology of the subject and the metaphysics of it. Of these in their order.

The Eclectic Reviewer, after enumerating various theological squabbles, says, "At last it has come to this, that the Christian world is called upon to decide this most curious question, What is faith?"

This, however is not the question. The question is, what is is, a question not to be determined by examining the meaning of the English word, nor by enquiring into the powers of the mind; but by ascertaining what idea is expressed by the word selected under the influence of inspiration. This is a question that must be answered by every translator of the scripture. It is in vain for him to say melius sentire quam scire, he must know, if he would discharge aright the all-important trust which has been committed to him and he must express his knowledge distinctly and accurately. Nor can I conceive of a more important subject presenting itself to the mind of a translator, than the proper choice of a word to represent this in the original scripture. On his choice may depend the spiritual welfare of thousands. Let us suppose that when a Cary or a Marshman, or a Martyn, in translating the sacred writings into the copious and extensive languages which were the objects of their study, come to the rendering of this word, how must they proceed?

They must manifestly ascertain its signification in the Greek, by examining its etymology and its applications, and they must then find a word that as nearly as possible expresses the same radical idea, and is capable of the same applications. But let us suppose that on examining the vocabulary of the language into which they are translating, some doubt arises; they find, for example, that there is a word which expresses believing propositions on any species of evidence whatever, but which is never used to express confidence in a person, except so far as believing what he says, may imply confidence in him-that, for example, it never expresses confidence in his power, or skill, or liberality, or integrity; and that there is another word which is used to express confidence generally, and is equally applicable to believing propositions and trusting to other qualities, but which is never used to express believing propositions, except upon the evidence of testimony, how are they now to decide? Is it not manifest that if they find any of these

words correspond to the words in all its applications, it is their duty to use that word as its constant representative; but that if there be no word of such general import, and that one word expresses the idea conveyed by it in one application of it, and another in another, they must then carefully observe the various applications, and use those particular words which express the idea conveyed by it in the different situations in which it stands.

These remarks will be applied in the sequel. In the meantime, let us suppose that we are engaged in translating the scriptures into English for the first time, and that we have come to some passage which requires us to find a suitable word, as a translation of or its verb πιςεύω. I cannot conceive of a more important subject of deliberation that can be presented to the mind of a Christian scholar. Let us enter upon it with suitable feelings of responsibility, and with that reliance on the divine teaching which is manifestly so necessary to us,

Our first object is to enquire into the sense of πιεις and πιςεύω,

Here I shall not repeat what I have already stated in the critical essay on the subject which I have subjoined to the volume of sermons; but shall content myself with referring the reader to it, making only such additional remarks as are called for by the strictures of the reviewers.

In that essay I have investigated the various applications of the two Greek words in question, and proved, as I conceived, and still do conceive, satisfactorily that they are employed in the New Testament, and in the Septuagint Old Testament and Apocrypha, to express generally trust or confidence-that, when they are used with reference to God or Christ, they denote confidence, either in all those attributes and works of God and Christ which are fitted to engage our confidence, or in some particular attribute or work which may be expressly mentioned, as mercy, love, the atonement, the blood of Christ, &c.-that