this year is ended, be carried to their long home: Neither health nor strength, nor prosperity, can ward off the stroke of death, nor postpone it a single hour beyond the time fixed in the purpose of Heaven. Sudden and unexpected was the call to the children of Job: they were in the prime of life, cheerful and happy with ' one another, enjoying the pleasures relished at their time of life, when, all on a sudden, the noise of their mirth ceased, and the house of feasting and joy became a place of silence. Watch and be ready; for at such an hour as ye think not, the Son of man cometh. Blessed is that servant, whom his Lord, when he cometh, shall find watching!' ADJUTOR. THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHER. ON VISION. In a former paper the different parts of the Eye were de scribed we shall now endeavour to point out their uses in producing sight. Rays of light issue from all visible bodies in every direction; and, when they pass out of a rarer into a denser medium, as out of air into water, or into glass, they are re fracted, or bent out of their course. If a ray of light falls upon water, and a line be drawn from the point in which the ray meets the water, perpendicularly to its surface, the ray will be refracted towards that line. If the surface of the medium be convex, like that of a reading-glass, it will be refracted towards a line drawn from a point where the ray enters the glass, to the centre of con vexity. So, if two parallel rays enter such a medium, each ray being refracted towards this line, they will meet at a certain point, called The Focus. Two diverging rays will be brought nearer together, and two converging rays, or rays which were tending to the same point, will meet sooner than if they had not entered the glass. The effect of the rays being thus brought together, will be to produce an image of the object from which the rays proceed at the focus of the glass. Thus, if a convex, glass be held so as to receive rays from a lighted candle, an inverted image of the candle will be formed on a piece of paper, placed at the focus of the glass. The annexed figure is intended to represent the manner in which this effect is produced. RH.is a section of a convex glass; C the centre of convexity of the surface; RBH, C F, CB, and CG, lines drawn from the point where the rays enter the glass to the centre of convexity; AE represent a lighted candle. The diverging rays, A Fand A G, which issue from the top of the flame, instead of proceeding in the direction of the dotted line, will be refracted towards the lines C F, and C G will be brought narer together, and meet at D. In the same manner, E F and EG, which proceed from the lower part of the flame, will meet B R H at P; and, as the rays from the intermediate parts will be collected to a point at the same distance, a complete inverted image of the candle will be formed, which will be larger or less than the object, in proportion as the candle is nearer to or farther from the glass. It is upon this principle that the chrystalline humour produces an image of every object we see. The rays * of light, entering at the pupil, a b, are brought to a focus, and form an inverted representation of the object in the retina. If from the back part of a bullock's eye the three coats be removed, so as to leave the vitreous humour perfect, and a piece of white paper be put against the humour, and the eye in this state be held near a lighted candle, an image of the candle will be formed on the paper, in the same manner as in the former experiment, by means of the convex glass. The use of the cornea, BEC, is to occasion the diverging rays to meet in a focus sooner than they would if they only passed through the chrystalline humour. When the cornea is too convex, the image is formed before the rays reach the retina; or, when not sufficiently protuberant, the image is formed beyond the retina: in either case, the object appears indistinct. The former is the case with short-sighted persons, who are assisted by concave glasses, which throw the image farther back. The latter defect is usually pro duced by age, when the cornea becomes less protuberant, and is removed by convex glasses, which bring the image nearer the front of the eye. When a distinct image is produced on the retina, an idea of the object is transmitted to the mind, as is conjectured by means of the small nerves of the retina, which communicate with the brain, through the optic nerve +. It is truly astonishing to reflect on the number of objects which may be circumstantially painted on the retina at one moment, within the compass of sixpence, without the least confusion. A stage coach,' says Dr. Paley, travelling at its ordinary rate for half an hour, passes, in the eye, only over one twelfth part of an inch, yet the change of place is distinctly perceived throughout its whole progress t.' None less than God could contrive, See Evan. Mag. page 188, d f, Fig. 1. + Derham's Physico Theology, page 95. Nat. Theol. page $5. order, and provide an organ as magnificent and curious as it is useful and important! But it will be of little avail, O Reader! to be possessed of natural sight, and to be capable of discerning the beauties of nature, if the eye of thy mind receives not the light of divine truth, or receives it in so imperfect a way, that its image is neither formed on thy heart, nor reflected in thy life! The beauties of nature have been in vain explored and admired; if the wonders of grace have been neglected, you have lived in vain. There is a far nobler object for your contemplation! It is He who is called The Life of the world, and the Light of men! The Saviour's come, by ancient bards foretold ! CONSEQUENCES OF T. P. B. THE DENIAL OF CHRIST'S DIVINITY. FORMERLY we considered the necessity of the divine dignity of Jesus to the success of his undertaking. We now would attend to some of the few consequences of the denial of this doctrine, and which attach to that system which rejects it. The denial of the divinity of the Saviour tends to produce, as its native fruit, the greatest indifference both to principle and practice. If a merely buman substitute and Saviour was all that was necessary, what can we suppose, but that all are in tolerably favourable circumstances, and involved in no material or alarming danger? Hence, we find Socinians speaking of the heathen, in all their superstition and idolatries, as only taking different ways of recommending themselves to their common parent, whe may be equally well pleased with them all. When the doctrine of Jesus's Deity, which is so clearly and strikingly made known in the Scripture, is explained away as figurative, and metaphorical allusion or embellishment, or hyperbolical description, because not suited to the opinions or inclinations of Socinians, on the same principle, every doctrine that does not quadrate with the pride, the presumption, or the propensities of ungodly men, may be explained away or rejected. The very system leads to absolute indifference about religious principles: hence they palliate and excuse the grossest errror, and even treat Divine Revelation with very little ceremony when it will not bend to their wishes. Hence Dr. Priestley conceives the apostles to have often reasoned inconclusively, and Moses to have written lame accounts. It were surely better for these men to throw off the mask at once, than to be amusing themselves with the name of Christians, while, in fact, they are shaking hands with Deists as brethren, and becoming pioneers to those hosts that defy the armies of the living God! But this system is as much calculated to promote and foster licentiousness of conduct, as to produce an indifference of principle. If a created arm was sufficient to effect their deliver ance, surely sin against God must be but a trivial failure, — a trifling fault, or a mere frailty. If we view it in this light, shall we fear to indulge in it? Shall we hate it with a perfect hatred ? or, suppose ourselves very criminal in committing it? The system is calculated to drive every such apprehension from our minds. We cannot love that Saviour much who did and could do us so little benefit; and we cannot have much reverence or respect for the character of God, who made so much ado, -uttering threatenings, instituting penalties, and demanding a satisfaction for what appears so venial and trifling. All reverence and respect for the character of Jesus is almost lost in this system: hence, we hear Dr. Priestley speaking of him as fallible or peccable like Moses, or like any of the Prophets. That system which produces the rank weeds of immorality, cannot be divine in its origin, nor heavenly in its tendency. This is in effect, though not in words, acknowledged by some of its abettors. Mrs. Barbauld styles Socinianism the frigid zone of Christianity;' and says, that speculative persons will always be the first, and serious Christians the last, to embrace a rational system of faith, or Socinianism, so called by it friends. We observe further, that from what we formerly stated of the doctrine of Jesus's divinity, the Socinian system, which denies it, contradicts the testimony of the faithful and true witness, and is a virtual rejection of it. Does not Jesus testify that he is the true God? Does he not say, I and my Father are one?' Did he give the least hint that the Jews mistook his meaning, when they said that he blasphemed in calling himself the Son of God, making himself equal with God? Or did he relinquish his claims and pretensions, when they said he blasphemed, by pretending to forgive sins, which none could do but God? Did he not make good his claim, by restoring the lame to soundness and strength? Did he not refer the objectors among the Jews to the works he performed, as a proof of his being equal with God? And to shew that he viewed himself as truly God, he claims the same worship as the Father, and gives his disciples to understand that their applications to his Father must be through him, and he would bestow on them what they needed. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it." All this is quite inexplicable on the Socinian hypothesis, that Jesus is a mere man, fallible and peccable like Moses, or any of the Prophets. But admitting his own claim, that he is God, all is plain, and natural, and consistent. The Socinian system then contradicts the testimony of the faithful and true witness, and in effect is a rejection of the whole of Revelation; for it is absurd to deny one of its principal articles, and yet pretend to admit any part of it. Socinianism, then, instead of being compli mented with the name of Christianity, is nothing else than an ill-adjusted system of Deism. We observe again, as another consequence of the denial of Jesus's divinity, and which attaches itself, with all its weight, to Socinianism, is, that it leaves the soul involved in all its guilt, and exposed to all the horrors of the second death. Our guilt. is infinite, and therefore far too ponderous a burden for any created agent to bear. But Socinians view Jesus as a mere man; they therefore, like the Jews, have to look for another, for he who is revealed to us in the Scriptures, according to their views of him, must be utterly unable to become responsible for them. Infinite wrath stands against us. A creature, as the Socinian deliverer is, would sink under it, and, perishing in the attempt himself, leave us involved in ruin. No deliverance can be effected for us on the Socinian hypothesis:-no; but all the wrath due to men for sin, remains still upon them. How absurd and destructive their motions, which lead them to reject a Saviour every way able to save to the uttermost, and put their trust in one who is utterly inadequate to deliver them at all! Consider then, if infinite guilt be your verdict, and infinite punishment be your desert, a finite Being cannot save you; and you are yet involved in the awful punishment, in all its magnitude and horrors. Weigh these things seriously; let the terrors of the Lord influence you, and his own word direct you, they are meant for your good, with the most tender desire for your eternal welfare. Falkland. MR. EDITOR, ON MINISTERS' SALARIES. URIEL. I HAVE seen, at different times, a page or two of your valuable Magazine occupied in laying before the Religious Public an account of the inadequate provision which many congregations make for their ministers; and arguments used to draw the attention of the friends of genuine religion to the subject, and to stimulate them to exert themselves to render those who minister to them in holy things, in some degree comfortable. But, after waiting from year to year, in expectation that some plan would be devised to remedy the evil, and remove all just ground of complaint, I have neither seen or heard, although my acquaintance with the Protestant Dissenters, called Orthodox, is pretty extensive, that any thing has been done to ameliorate the condition of those who have too much reason to complain. Is it not shameful, dces it not argue a want of all due consideration, that not a few dissenting congregations can raise as much at one collection, for certain objects, as they raise for their minister in the whole year? Is there not something in this like detestable pride, and vain-glory, - well knowing that their liberality will be exhibited to the view of all who read certain Publications? I have frequently been grieved to hear persons, who |