the exigencies of a particular theory could have induced Mr. White to have propounded so questionable a proposition.

While I fully concur with the general principles which are involved in propositions twelve and thirteen, I cannot but think that the theory which is propounded in number five, that man, as man, perishes at death, and that only a portion of him, though a very important one, continues to exist in Hades, seriously interferes with the idea that those who have had no opportunity of embracing the Gospel here will have the opportunity afforded them of embracing it in the underworld. How, I ask, can this be possible if man, as man, no longer exists after death? In that case it would not be the man, but only a portion of him, which would be capable of being evangelised in Hades. Mr. White elsewhere lays it down as necessary to man's full responsibility for his actions during his earthly life, that his complete manhood should be reconstituted by the re-union of the body with that portion of him. which survives death (by whatever name we choose to designate it, be it personality, spirit, or soul), in order that the former, having been a sharer with the personality in its actions during life, may also be a sharer in the consequences which will result from those actions in the unseen world; for, according to the theory, the personality when separated from the body does not constitute the man, but only a portion of him.

I have drawn attention to these points for the purpose of showing with what unnecessary difficulties theories such as the above encumber the subject under consideration. It is right, however, to observe that the reason why a great deal of questionable matter has been introduced into this controversy is, that it is the object of the theory designated "Conditional Immortality," or "Life in Christ," to establish two positions which are wholly distinct from one another. The first of these is

That the endless life of the righteous will not be the result

of any natural immortality inherent in man, but that it is a free gift of God imparted through the incarnation, and is due to a creative act of God, designated regeneration, and is the consequence of the regenerate man abiding in Christ and Christ in him.

The second

That the punishment of the wicked in the world to come will not be of endless duration.

The proof of this first position is supposed to afford additional strength to the second. It seems to me, on the contrary, greatly to weaken it, by introducing into the controversy a wide range of subjects the evidence of which is of a very complicated and doubtful character.

For the purpose of enabling the reader to form a judgment as to the highly complicated nature of portions of the argument, I cannot do better than quote the titles which Mr. White has affixed to nine chapters, occupying nearly onethird of the entire work. They are as follows::

1. The Serpent in Genesis: an Excursus on the Scripture doctrine of an Evil Superhuman Agency concerned in the Destruction of Mankind.

2. The Death Penalty of the Mosaic Law.

3. The Opposed Doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees in relation to a Future Life, and Christ's Rejection of both. 4. The incarnation of the Life, or the Logos made flesh, that man might live eternally.

5. Justification of Life.

6. The New Covenant of Life in the Blood of Christ; or the Nature of the Death of Christ, and its place in the Divine Government as an Atonement for Sin.

7. Regeneration unto Life, through Union with the Incarnate Word, by the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life.

8. Hades, or the State of Man between Death and the Resurrection, under the Economy of Redemption.

9. The Resurrection to Life Eternal at the Coming and Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I need hardly observe that the discussion of these positions involves us in questions in the highest degree difficult of solution, and respecting which eminent Christian writers, the sincerity of whose search after truth it is impossible to question, have taken, and still continue to take, very divergent views. But inasmuch as the titles of these chapters give the reader only a faint idea of the amount of abstract matter which is thus introduced into this controversy, and of the consequent uncertainty of the basis which it affords for the erection on it of a theory of retribution, I will name some of the subjects discussed in them in the author's own words. Thus—

1. In the chapter entitled "The Incarnation of the Life; or the Logos made Flesh that Man may live eternally," the following subjects are discussed :

Christ's deity the crux of the Gospels; object of John to deify Christ; John's doctrine of the Logos; triple personality of Christ; eternal life by the incarnation; eclipse of faith by mysticism; genius of Oriental thought; definiteness of the Greek language; the Book of Genesis the key to Scripture; the Rabbinical doctrine of a judgment to come.

2. In the chapter entitled "Justification of Life" the following subjects are brought under discussion:

Forensic justification; fourfold justification; patristic justification; three errors in justification; justification and immortal life; influence of psychology on the doctrine of justification.

3. In the next chapter we are involved in the discussion of the following profound and abstract questions :

The nature of the death of Christ; the curse borne by Christ; the meaning of salvation by blood; the atonement of Christ; the propitiatory sacrifice; causes of Unitarian doctrine; an excursus on the sensibility of God.

D D

Surely the investigation of this last subject is an attempt to intrude into things which transcend the powers of the finite intellect of man.

Not to weary the reader's patience, I will only trouble him with an enumeration of some of the subjects treated in the chapter entitled "Regeneration unto Life :"

Apostolic doctrine of the new birth; spiritual regeneration in baptism; Nonconformist ideas on baptism; apostolic doctrine on baptism; patristic ideas on baptism; influence of the patristic doctrine; regeneration through the Word; regeneration through fragmentary truth; body, soul, and spirit; the creation of the Pneuma; complex origin of lives; signs of regenerate life; physical and spiritual germ life, &c., &c.

It is hardly necessary to observe that most of these subjects, thus unnecessarily introduced into this controversy, form some of the most difficult problems of theology. Not a few of them are theories representing the view of the doctrine of the atonement and of the regeneration of man which is held by that section of the Church usually designated evangelical, Others involve questions going to the utmost limits of human thought, and some which transcend its limits altogether. On their discussion whole libraries have been written; and yet men, equally able, learned, pious, and earnest seekers after truth in all ages of the Church, have arrived at widely different conclusions from precisely the same data. What, then, is the inference which may justly be drawn from this diversity of opinion among such men as the above by those who come to the study of these subjects unbiassed by system and free from the trammels which it imposes? Surely, that the data on which such theories have been erected must be of a very uncertain character, and therefore that they can form no essential portion of Christianity. What; then, Are they? Even if we rate them at the highest, they are not affirmations of revealed truth, but deductions of human

reason from certain principles supposed to be contained in it; and as such they are subject to all the uncertainties arising from the errors to which the logical intellect is liable when it attempts to grapple with abstract questions, not a few of which involve us in the discussion of subjects transcending its grasp. Respecting these and all similar questions the words of Job are true, "Therefore have I uttered things that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, that I knew not."

If, then, to proclaim glad tidings to the poor is one of the great characteristics of Christianity which distinguish it from every religion of the past or of the present; if, as our Lord affirmed, He was anointed with the Spirit of God for this very purpose; if He came not to call the righteous but sinners; if it is true that He rejoiced in spirit, and said, "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes," then the discussion of such questions as "forensic justification," "fourfold justification," "the influence of psychology on the doctrine of justification," "the triple personality of Christ," "the nature of His death, and of the curse of the law borne by Him," "the meaning of salvation by blood," "the sensibility of God," "the creation of the pneuma," "complex origin of lives," "physical and spiritual germ life," and many others introduced into this argument, being, as they are, questions only capable of being understood by the wise and prudent, even if they are by them, can have no other effect than that of encumbering with a number of perplexing difficulties a subject which ought to be of the profoundest interest, and therefore intelligible to the humblest Christian. But even with respect to theologians and professed students of such subjects, if it is necessary for them to wait until something like a unanimity of opinion is arrived at respecting such