Now, the reader is requested to observe that what precedes is _the direct contradictory_ of the position which Mr. Jowett has written his Essay in order to establish. And thus we keep for ever coming back to his πρῶτον ψεῦδος,--the fundamental falsity which underlies the whole of what he has written. (ii) But although we have eagerly resorted to Scripture itself in order to ascertain _on what principle_ Scripture ought to be interpreted, we cannot for a moment allow some of the sophistries with which the Reverend Author has encumbered the question, to escape without castigation. He may not first court an appeal to the School of Apostolical Interpretation; and then, before the result of that appeal has been ascertained, go off in praise of the illumination of the present age; and claim to represent the Theological mind of Europe in his own person. "Educated persons," (he has the impertinence to assert,) "are _beginning to ask_ (!), not what Scripture may be _made_ to mean, but what it _does_. And it is no exaggeration to say that he who in the present state of knowledge will confine himself to _the plain meaning of words_, and the study of their context, may know more of the original spirit and intention of the authors of the New Testament _than all the controversial writers of former ages put together_." (pp. 340-1.) This might be tolerated perhaps, in the self-constituted oracle of a Mechanics' Institute; but as proceeding from a Divinity Lecturer in one of the first Colleges in Oxford, I hesitate not to declare that such an opinion is simply disgraceful. Very much of a piece with this, in point of flippancy,--(though barely consistent with his frequent assertions that the entire subject is hemmed in by grave difficulties,)--are the Regius Professor of Greek's remarks on the value of learning as a help to the Interpretation of Holy Writ. "_Learning obscures_ as well as illustrates." (p. 337.)--"There seem to be reasons for doubting whether any _considerable light_ can be thrown on the New Testament from inquiry into _the language_." (p. 393.)--"Minute corrections of tenses or particles are _no good_." (p. 393.)--"Discussions respecting the chronology of St. Paul's life and his second imprisonment; or about the identity of James, the brother of the LORD; or, in another department, _respecting the use of the Greek article,--have gone far beyond the line of utility_." (p. 393.) "The minuteness of the study of Greek in our own day has also a tendency _to introduce into the text associations_ which are not really found there." (p. 391.)--Lastly, he complains of "the error of interpreting every particle, as though it were a link in the argument; instead of being, as is often the case, _an excrescence of style_." (p. 391.)