Verses 17 to 22. After reading these verses, Professor Newman wrote as follows:-- 'In various attempts at compromise--such as conceding the scriptural fallibility in human science but maintaining its spiritual perfection--I always found the division impracticable. At last it pressed on me that it I admitted morals to rest on an independent basis, it was dishonest to shut my eyes to any apparent collisions of morality with the Scriptures. A very notorious and decisive instance is that of Jael. Sisera when beaten in battle fled to the tent of his friend Heber, and was there warmly welcomed bv Jael, Heber's wife. After she had refreshed him with food and lulled him to sleep, she killed him, by driving a nail into his temples, and for this deed (which now-a-days would be called a perfidious murder), the prophetess Deborah, in an inspired psalm, pronounces Jael to be "blessed above women," and glorifies her act by an elaborate description of its atrocity. As soon as I felt that I was bound to pass a moral judgment on this, I saw that as regards the Old Testament the battle was already lost.' *Chapter v. This Song of Deborah, like other oriental songs, is strongly figurative. Verse 8. Instead of 'They chose new gods, then was war in the gates,' the Douay has it, 'The Lord chose new wars and himself overthrew the gates of his enemies.' {111} Verse 12. There were no captives to lead--all were killed. (See. chap, iv., v. 16.) Verse. 23. Where and what was Meroz? Was it a city or a country? Were its inhabitants Israelites or Canaanites? No one knows. It is the only time it is mentioned throughout the whole of the Bible. Verse 26. The Douay in this Terse says nothing about smiting off Sisera's head, neither does chap, iv., v. 21. *Chapter vi. On page 79 I remarked on the account of the total destruction of the Midianitish nation, and I have now to submit that one of the accounts must be positively untrue. If 'every male' was killed by the Israelites, there can be no foundation for the statement that the Midianites 'came as grasshoppers for multitude, for both they and their camels were without number.' Verses 8 to 10. This prophet was a shrewd fellow; he only related the past, but did not attempt to foretell the future. Why is he called a prophet? The whole of this chapter is very confused. In vv. 11 and 12 the 'angel of the Lord' appears, but in vv. 14 and 16 it is 'the Lord,' and in vv. 20 and 21 the 'angel of the Lord' again, and this is rendered still more confused by vv. 22 and 23, as it is nowhere said to be death to see an angel. Verse 21. This is quite a type of modern conjuring--to set on fire the flesh and cakes by touching them with a magic wand. The Douay, to make the matter more complete, says that the angel 'vanished.' Gideon seems to have been very unbelieving, and to have required many miracles before he would accept God's message.