"It has to be considered whether the intellectual forms under which Christianity has been described, may not also be _in a state of transition_." (p. 420.) "Now, as _the Interpretation of Scripture is receiving another character_, it seems that distinctions of Theology which were in great measure based on old Interpretations, are _beginning to fade away_." ... "There are other signs that times are changing, and we are changing too." (p. 421.) "These reflections bring us back to the question with which we began,--_What effect will the critical Interpretation of Scripture have on Theology?_" (p. 422.) Again:--"As the time has come when it is no longer possible to ignore the results of criticism, it is of importance that Christianity should be seen to be in harmony with them." (p. 374.) (The sentences which immediately follow shall be exhibited in distinct paragraphs, in order that they may separately enjoy admiration. Each is a gem or a curiosity in its way.) "That objections to some received views _should be valid_, and yet that they should be always held up as _the objections of Infidels_,--is a mischief to the Christian cause." "It is a mischief that critical observations which any intelligent man can make for himself (!), should be ascribed to Atheism or Unbelief." "It would be a strange and almost incredible thing that the Gospel, which at first made war only on the vices of mankind, should now be _opposed_ to one of the highest and rarest of human virtues,--_the love of Truth_." "And that in the present day the great object of Christianity should be, not to change the lives of men, but to prevent them from changing their opinions; _that_ would be a singular inversion of the purposes for which CHRIST came into the world." We are really constrained to pause for a moment, and to inquire what this last sentence means. Are not "the lives of men" mainly _dependent_ on "their opinions?" Why then contrast the two? And _which_ of our "opinions" does Mr. Jowett desire to see changed? Would he have us resign our belief in the Atonement? reject the Divinity of CHRIST? deny the Personality of the HOLY GHOST? put the Bible on a level with Sophocles and Plato? ridicule the idea of Inspiration?... How would it be a "singular inversion of the purposes of CHRIST'S Coming," that Christianity should "prevent" mankind from "changing" such "opinions" as _these?_ "The Christian religion is in a false position when _all the tendencies of knowledge are opposed to it_." (_All the tendencies of knowledge, then, are opposed to the Christian Religion!_)