(S . -L , ' o j~f ^ ■^^ ^X t\i« Wxtahfiicm ^^ PRINCETON, N. J. % 9i Presented by W(2y5\ b\ e^rxV V^W O rA A BX 9175 .H5 18A2 Hill, George, 1750-1819 Lectures in divinity LIBRARY OF PRINCETON FEB I 0 2005 THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY >\ 'V \ ^ LECTURES { L J u^-^-e.'^^^ (^ ^^--c^ ^ IN DIVINITY. By THE LATE , GEORGE HILL, D.D. PRINCIPAL OF ST. MAKY's COLLEGE, ST. ANDREWS. EOITED FROM HIS MANUSCRirT, BV HIS SON, THE REV. ALEXANDER HILL, MINISTER OF DAILLV. tieRARYOfPRINCnON 1 FEB I 0 20(6 THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PHILADELPHIA: PUBLISHED BY HERMAN HOOKER, N. W. CORNER OF CHESTNfT AND FIFTH STS. 18 42. PREFACE BY THE EDITOR. The author of the following Lectures was appointed Pro- fessor of Divinity in 1 788, and completed the plan which he had formed for himself, in about four years. In every succeeding year, he revised with unwearied care that part of his course which he intended to read to his students ; and not a few of the Lectures appear to have been recently transcribed. He took no steps himself for publishing them as a whole ; but he is known to have had this in contemplation ; and at his death he consigned them to the Editor, in such terms as implied that the publication of them would not be in opposition to his wishes. It will be agreeable, the Editor believes, to the wishes of that large proportion of the ministers of the church of Scotland, who went from the hall of St. Mary's College with unfeigned respect for the character and talents of the Author, to peruse those prelections which commanded the attention of their earlier years. And he is well persuaded, that there are many, who, from personal attachment to the Author, or from a knowledge of his high reputation, are anxious to become acquainted with his sentiments, on points so important as those which his Lec- tures embrace. These considerations alone, however, would not have induced the Editor tb disclose liis father's manuscripts to the public eye. In the conclusion of his opening address, as Professor of Di- lU IV PREFACE. vinity, the Author pledged himself by making this solemn declaration : " Under the blessing and direction of the Almighty in whose hands I am, and to whom I must give account, no industry or research, no expense of time or of thought, shall be wanting on my part, to render my labours truly useful to the students of divinity in this college." It was under a strong impression that this pledge has been fully redeemed : — in the firm belief that the publication of his theological lectures, one of the principal fruits of the Author's active and laborious life, will do honour to his memory ; — and in the anxious hope that the object for which the Lectures were written, to teach and to defend "the truth as it is in Jesus," may be thus more largely attained, that the Editor resolved to present them to the world. He cannot withdraw from the charge, which he has felt it both a duty and a pleasure to fulfil, without expressing the in- creased veneration, which an attentive perusal of the Lectures has excited in his bosom for the Author; and without ofiering a fervent prayer to God, that the church, of which he formed so distinguished a member, may never want men, on whom the example of his diligence and success may freely operate, who may be equally eminent in biblical and theological learning, and may cherish his liberal, enlightened, and truly Christian views. The Author himself divided his course into Books, and Chapters, and Sections, first when he printed the heads of his Lectures for the use of his students, and afterwards in a larger work, entitled " Theological Institutes." In the present publi- cation, the same arrangement has been adopted. This has necessarily led to some inconsiderable changes on the Lectures, as they were read from the chair. But the Editor has been scrupulous in making as few other alterations on the manuscript as possible. The introductory discourse to the students, which related to the sentiments and character essential for them to maintain, has been much abridged, as it bore in some measure PREFACE. upon local circumstances in tlie University of St. Andrews. And towards the end of this work, it will be found, by a refe- rence to the notes, that those parts of the course have been omitted, which the Author himself had previously given to the public. It was the wish of the Editor to subjoin a note of reference to every quotation made by the Author. But in the manuscript it frequently happened that there was nothing to lead him parti- cularly to the passage or authority cited. In his remote situa- tion he had not access to all the books which it was necessary to consult ; and even with the assistance of his friends, he has not been uniformly successful in comparing the quotations with the works from which they are extracted. He has annexed to different chapters the names of the books which the Author was accustomed to recommend to his students, with some of the comments which he made on them. His remarks, however, were usually delivered without having been written ; and hence, comparatively few are preserved. It may be thought, that the printed lists of books recom- mended are far from being complete. But it is to be considered, that, at the commencement of the Author's labours, the library of St. Andrews was deficient in modern theological works ; that those which were more immediately useful were only gradually procured ; that it was far from being his object to load the memory, or to distract the attention of his students by multi- farious reading ; and that, as the business of his profession occupied his mind to the end of his days, it is probable that there was no publication of moment, which he had an opportu- nity of perusing, of which he did not in his class-room deliver an opinion. Manse of Dailly, April 23, 1821. 2 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. It was in contemplation to present the following course of Lectures complete, by subjoining to this edition the View of the Constitution of the Church of Scotland, and the Counsels respecting the Duties of the Pastoral Office, which were pub- lished during the Author's lifetime. But being unwilling to make alterations on a work which has been so favourably received, the Editor sends it forth in the state in which it originally appeared, only freed, he trusts, from many of the errata which had crept into the first edition. Such readers as may wish to peruse those parts of the course which are not contained in this work, will find a note referring to them at the end of the volume. Manse of Dailly, ^pril 21, 1825. Vll CONTENTS. BOOK I. EVIDENCES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE, 1 Belief of a Deity founded on the constitution of the Human Mind — Almost universal — Moral government of God traced in the constitution of Human Nature, and the state of the world — Brought to light by the Gospel. CHAP. I. COLLATERAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY FROM HISTORY, , . 10 CHAP. H. AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 12 Sect. 1. External Evidence of their authenticity full and various — Internal marks. 2. Various readings — Sources of correction. CHAP. m. INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY, 18 Manner in which the claim of containing a divine revelation is advanced in the New Testament — Contents of the Books — System of religion and morality — Condition of the sacred writers — Character of Jesus Christ and of the Apostles. CHAP. IV. DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY MIRACLES, . . 27 Sect. 1. Argument from the miracles of Jesus — Uniformity of the course of nature — Power of the Almighty to interpose — Communication of this power a striking mark of a divine commission — Harmony between the internal and external evidence of Christianity — Mira- cles of the Gospel illustrate its peculiar doctrines. 2. Mr. Hume's argument against miracles — Circumstances which render the testimony of the Apostles credible — Confirmation of their testi- mony— Faith of the first Christians — Manner in which the miracles of Jesus are narrated — No opposite testimony. 3. How far the argument from miracles is affected by the prodigies and miracles mentioned in history — Duration of miraculous gifts in the Christian church. CHAP. V. ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, .... 53 John xi. Exhibition of character — The historian — The other Apostles — The family of Lazarus — Our Lord — Resurrection of Lazarus — Effects produced by the miracle. / CHAP. VI. EXTERNAL EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY PROPHECY, .... 70 Si:cT. 1. Antiquity and integrity of the books of the Old Testament — Hope of the Messiah founded on the received interpretation of the prophecies. 2. Correspondence between the circumstances of Jesus, and the predic- tions of the Old Testament. 2* C ix CONTENTS. Pase 3. Direct prophecies of the Messiah — Double sense of prophecy — Not inconsistent with the nature of prophecy — Supported by the general use of language. 4. Quotations in the New Testament from the Old Testament. 5. Amount of the argument from prophecy. CHAP. VII. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS, . 93 Magnificence and extent of the system of prophecy — Jesus the object of the old prophecies, and the author of new ones — Advantages of attending to the pro- phecies of our Lord and his Apostles — Clearness and importance of his pre- dictions— Specimens. CHAP. VIII. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, 123 Resurrection of Christ an essential fact in the history of his religion — Evidence upon which it rests — Evidence of it in these later ages — Universal belief of the fact— Clear testimony of the Apostles — Their extraordinary powers. CHAP. IX. PROPAGATIC^ OF CHRISTIANITV, 132 Sect. 1. When the success of a religious system forms a legitimate argument for its divine original — Progress of Mahometanism and Christianity compared. 2. Secondary causes of the progress of Christianity assigned by Mr. Gibbon considered. 3. Rank and character of some of the early converts to Christianity. 4. Measure of the effect produced by the means employed in propagating the Gospel — Objections drawn from it — Answers. BOOK II. GENERAL VIEW OF THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. CHAP. I. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE, 154 Inspiration not impossible — Three degrees of it — Necessary to the Apostles for the purposes of their mission — Promised by our Lord — Claimed by them- selves— Admitted by their disciples — Not contradicted by any thing in their writings. CHAP. II. PECULIAR DOCTRINES OF CHRISTIANITY, 173 CHAP. m. CHRISTIANITY OF INFINITE IMPORTANCE, 188 Sect. 1. The Gospel a republication of Natural Religion — Mistakes occasioned by the use of this term. 2. The Gospel a method of saving sinners — Duties consequent upon the revelation of this method. CHAP. IV. DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM, 203 Difficulties to be expected — Extent of our knowledge. CHAP. V. USE OF REASON' IN RELIGION, • 209 CONTENTS. XI Pige - CHAP. VI. CONTROVERSIES OCCASIONED BY THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM, . . .216 Multiplicity of Theological Controversies — Platonic and Peripatetic Philosophy — Progress of Science — Authority of the Fathers. CHAP. VII. ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE, 234 The Gospel a remedy for sinners — All opinions respecting it relate to the per- sons by whom the remedy is brought, or to the nature, extent, and application of the remedy — Church government. BOOK III. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SON, THE SPIRIT, AND THE MANNER OP THEIR BEING UNITED WITH THE FATHER. CHAP. I. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE PERSON OF THE SON, .... 231 Three systems — Socinians — Arians — Council of Nice. CHAP. II. SIMPLEST OPINION CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST, . , . 239 Christ truly a Man — Not the whole doctrine of Scripture respecting him. CHAP. III. PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS, '. 242 Explicit declarations of Scripture — Socinian solution. CHAP. IV. ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS IN HIS PRK-EXISTENT STATE — CREATION, . 252 Sect. 1. John i. 1 — 18. 2. Coloss. i. 15—18. 3. Heb. i. 4. Amount of the proposition, that Jesus Christ is the Creator of the world. CHAP. V. ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE — ADMINISTRATION OF PROVIDENCE, 282 Sect. 1. All the divine appearances recorded in the Old Testament, referred to one Person, called Angel and God. 2. Christ the Jehovah, who appeared to the Patriarchs, was worshipped in the Temple, and announced as the author of a new Dispensation. 3. Objections to the preceding proposition — Different opinions as to the amount of it. CHAP. VI. DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST TAUGHT DURING HIS LIFE, 309 Reserve with which he revealed his dignity — Circumstances attending his Birth — Voice at his Baptism — Manner in which he spoke of the connexion between the Father and him — Omniscience — Miracles. CHAP. VII. DIRECT PROOF THAT CHRIST IS GOD, 319 Sect. 1. Jesus called God — Circumstances which intimate that the name is applied to Jesus in the highest sense. 2. Essential attributes of Deity ascribed to Jesus. 3. Worship represented as due to Jesus — Supreme and inferior wor'^hip of the Arians — Socinian explanatiLin of passages in which wor.-siiip is given to Jesus. Xll CONTENTS. CHAP. VIII. '''"' UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST, 341 Passages which present the divine and human nature of Christ together — Opi- nions as to the manner of their union — Gnostics — ApoUinaris — Nestorius— Eutyches — Monophy sites — Monothelites — Miraculous conception — Hyposta- tical union the key to a great part of the phraseology of Scripture — That which qualifies Jesus Christ to be the Saviour of the world. CHAP. IX. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT, 358 Form of Baptism — Instruction connected with the administration of Baptism — Catechumens — First Christians worshipped the Holy Ghost — Gnostics — Macedonius — Socinus — Personality of the Holy Ghost — His divinity. CHAP. X. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY, 367 Sect. 1. Unity of God, the doctrine of the Old and New Testament. 2. Three systems of the Trinity — Sabellian — Arian, and Semi-Arian — Catholic. 3. Principles by which the Catholic System repels the charge of Tritheism. 4. Dr. Clarke's system — Amount of our knowledge respecting the Trinity — Inferences. BOOK IV. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLI- CATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. CHAP. I. DISEASE FOR WHICH THE REMEDY IS PROVIDED, .... 391 Sect. 1. Genesis iii. — History of a real transaction, related after the symbolical manner. 2. Effects of Adam's fall upon his posterity — Four systems — Pelagius — Arminius — Human nature corrupted — Sin of Adam imputed — Calvinistic view embraces both corruption and imputation — Adam the representative of the human race — Difficulties. CHAP. II. OPINIONS concerning THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY, .... 413 Sect. 1. Socinians — The Gospel the most effectual lesson of righteousness — Defects of this System. 2. Right acquired by Jesus of saving men from their sins, and giving them immortality — Merits and defects of this system. 3. Catholic system, or that which has been generally held in the Chris- tian church — Atonement or satisfaction of Christ. / CHAP. HI. / doctrine of THE ATONEMENT, 4jiO— ?^ Sect. 1. Not irrational — God the righteous Governor of the universe — Honour of his laws to be maintained — Sin the transgression of law — Mean-' ing of Satisfaction — Acceptance of the Lawgiver, and concurrence of tlie Substitute in the substitution of Christ — Vicarious punish- ment— Why not practised in human judgments — Power of Christ over his own life — Deep malignity of sin, and exceeding kindnesfe and love of God. 2. Whethfr there was understood to be a substitution in the heathen sacrifices. CONTENTS. Xlll P«J8 3. Substitution implied in certain sin-ofFerintrs in the law of Moses — Day of atonement — Efficacy of tlie substitution — Nature of the sin- otTerinjTs. 4. Tliree great divisions of the law of INloses — The politic.il and ceremo- nial law temporary — Ceremonial law emblematical of the Gospel dispensation — Intimated by the prophets — Implied in many passages of the New Testament — Epistle to the Hebrews — Confirmation of the Catholic system from the views of the Apostle Paul — Reason- ings of the Socinians. 5. Direct support of the doctrine of the atonement from Scripture — Value annexed to the sufferings of Christ — His sufferings represented as a punishment of sin — Effects ascribed to them — Reconciliation — Redemption — Forgiveness of sins — Justification. CHAP. IV. ETERNAL LIFE, . . 482 Completeness of the Catholic system — Foundation of the hope of eternal life — Merits of Christ — Right to eternal life acquired for us by the death of Christ, confirmed by his life. CHAP. V. EXTENT OF THE REMEDY, 493 Sect. 1. First preliminary point — The Gospel designed to be an universal religion — Law of Moses a local dispensation — True character of the Gospel opened by incidental expressions — Unlimited commission given to the Apostles. 2. Second preliminary point — Remedy of the Gospel only for those who repent and believe — Speculations respecting the final condition of the wicked — Subject, beyond the limits of our faculties. BOOK IV. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLI- CATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. CHAP. VI. PARTICULAR REDEMPTION, ; 505 Arguments for Universal and Particular Redemption stated and compared. CHAP. vn. PREDESTINATION, 513 Sect. 1. Socinians — Contingent events not subjects of infallible foreknowledge — No predestination of individuals. 2. Arminians — Predestination of individuals dependent on the foreknow- ledge of their faith and good works, or of their unbelief and impeni- tence. 3. Calvinists — Entire dependence of the creature on the Creator — Extent of the Divine knowledge — One decree embracing all that is to be, means and end — Supralapsarians — Sublapsarians — Decree of Elec- tion absolute — Good pleasure of God — Covenant of Redemption — Merits of Christ a part of the Decree of Election — Decree of Repro- bation— Extent of the Remedy determined by the Divine decree. CHAP. VIII. APPLICATION OF THE REMEDV, 533 Production of the character required for enjoying the blessings of the Gospel — Opinions of the Socinians, Arminians, and Calvinists — Grace — Its nature and efficacy. XIV - CONTENTS. F«ge CHAP, IX. ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED, .... 541 Sect. 1. Arminian system satisfying upon a general view — Three difficulties, under which it labours, stated. 2. Objections to the Calvinistic System reducible to two. 3. Calvinistic System not inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent — Definition of liberty — Efficient and final causes — Both embraced by the plan of Providence — Whence the uncertainty in the operation of motives arise — How removed — Gratia Congrua — Renovation of the mind — Exhibition of such moral inducements as are fitted to call forth its powers. 4. Calvinistic System not inconsistent with the attributes of God — The ultima ratio of the inequality in the dispensation of the gifts, both of Nature and of Grace — Decree of reprobation exerts no influence upon men leading them to sin — Objection resolvable into the ques- tion concerning the Origin of Evil — Philosophical Answer — Armi- nians recur to the same Answer — The Glory of God — Moral Evil the obj ect of his abhorrence. CHAP. X. SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM, . . 571 Sect. 1. All the actions of men represented as comprehended in the great plan of Divine Providence. 2. Predestination ascribed in Scripture to the good pleasure of God — System of those who consider the expressions employed, as respect- ing only the calling of large societies to the knowledge of the Gospel. 3. Representations given in Scripture of the change of character produced by Divine Grace. 4. Objections arising from the commands, the counsels, and the exhorta- tions of Scripture. CHAP. XI. HISTORY OF CALVINISM, . . 587 BOOK V. INDEX OP PARTICULAR QUESTIONS, ARISING OUT OF OPINIONS CON- CERNING THE GOSPEL REMEDY, AND OF MANY OF THE TECHNICAL TERMS OF THEOLOGY. CHAP. I. REGENERATION — CONVERSION FAITH, 601 External and Effectual Call — Synergistic System — Fanaticism — Calvinistic View of Conversion — Faith — Different Kinds — Saving Faith. CHAP. H. JUSTIFICATION, GIO A Forensic act — Its nature — Church of Rome — First Reformers — Socinians and Arrninians — Calvinists — First and second Justification — Justification one act of God — Saints under the Old Testament — Other individuals not outwardly called — Perseverance of Saints — Assurance of Grace and Salvation — Reflex act of Faith — Witness of the Spirit. CHAP. III. CONNEXION BETWEEN JUSTIFICATION AND SANCTIFICATION, . . . 618 Good works, fruits of Faith — Apparent contradiction between Paul and James — Solifidians — Antinomians — Fratres liberi spiritus — Practical Preaching. CONTENTS. XV CHAP. IV. ^*" SANCTIFICATION, 625 Sect. 1. FirstpartofSanctification, Repentance — Its nature — Popish doctrine — Late Repentance — Precise time of Conversion. 2. Second part of Sanctification, a new life — Habit of Righteousness — Immutability of the Moral Law — Christian Casuistry — Counsels of Perfection — Merit of good works — Works of Supererogation. 3. Imperfection of Sanctification — Anabaptists — Mortal and venial sins — Distinction unwarranted — Romans vii. — Christian Morality. CHAP. V. COVENANT OF GRACE, 640 Scriptural terms — Kingdom of Christ — Union of Christ and his disciples — Adoption — Covenant of Grace. Sect. 1. Meaning of 6iaen'in — Covenant of Works — Sinaitic Covenant — Abra- hamic Covenant — New Covenant. 2. Mediator of the New Covenant — Offices of Christ — Mediatores Se- cundarii of the Church of Rome. 3. Prayer — Encouragements to it in the Covenant of Grace — Nature of Christ's intercession. 4. Sacraments — Explanation of the term — •'Signs and Seals of the Cove- nant of Grace — Seven Sacraments of the Church of Rome. CHAP. VL QUESTIONS CONCERNING BAPTISM, 656 Sect. 1. Prevalence of Washings in the religious ceremonies of all nations — How Baptism is a distinguishing rite of Christianity — Opinions of the Socinians and Quakers — Immersion and sprinkling — Giving a Name. 2. Baptism more than an initiatory rite — Opinions of the Church of Rome, and of the Reformed Churches. 3. Infant Baptism — View of arguments for it — Godfathers and God- mothers— Confirmation — Admission for the first time to the Lord's Supper. CHAP. vn. QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE LORd's SUPPER, 668 Institution — Correspondence between the Passover and the Lord's Supper Origin of different opinions respecting it — System of the Church of Rome Transubstantiation — Of Luther — Consubstantiation — Ubiquity — Of Zuino-Uus — A Commemoration — Of Calvin — Spiritual presence of Christ — Time of observing the ordinance. CHAP. VIIL CONDITION OF MEN AFTER DEATH, 680 Happiness of Heaven — Intermediate state — Purgatory — Duration of hell torments. BOOK VI. OPINIONS CONCERNING CHURCH GOVERNMENT. CHAP. L FOUNDATION OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT, 683 Ob]io"ation to observe Ordinances. CHAP. H. OPINIONS RESPECTING THE PERSONS IN WHOM CHURCH GOVERNMENT IS VESTED, 686 Sect. 1. Quakers — Deny necessity and lawfulness of a standing Ministry — Consequent disunion and disorder — Their principles repugnant to reason and Scripture. XVI CONTENTS. Page 2. Independents, or Congregational Brethren — Leading principle — Un- authorized by the examples of the New Testament, and contrary to the spirit of its directions — Implies disunion of the Christian Society. 3. Church of Rome — Papists and Roman Catholics — Gallican Church — Catholics of Great Britain — Unity of the Church — Grounds on which the primacy of the Pope is maintained — Matthew xvi. 16. — Scriptural and historical view of the Church of Rome — 2 Thess. ii. — Daniel vii. — Rev. xvii. 4. Episcopacy and Presbytery — Principles of the Episcopal form of Go- vernment— Of the Presbyterian — Points of agreement and differ- ence— Timothy and Titus — Bishop and Presbyter — Right of Ordi- nation— Succession of Bishops — Presbyterian form of government not a novel invention — Imparity among Bishops, of human institu- tion— Opinions of ancient writers upon the equality of Bishops and Presbyters — First Reformers — Presbyterian parity, CHAP. III. NATURE AND EXTENT OF POWER IMPLIED IN CHURCH GOVERNMENT, . 733 Not created by the State — Erastianism — A spiritual power — Conduct of our Lord and his apostles — Anabaptists — Church of Rome — Excommunication — The Lord Jesus Christ the Head of the Church — Purpose for which he gives power to his Ministers — Its limits. CHAP. IV. POTESTAS AoyiiaTlKT], 751 Scripture the only rule of faith — Articles of faith — Reasons for framing them — History of Confessions of Faith — Subscriptions to them. CHAP. V. POTESTAS AiaraKTtKVt 76i Conditions of Salvation declared in Scripture — What enactments the Church has power to make — Liberty of Conscience — Rule of Peace and Order — Puritans. CHAP. VL POTESTAS AiaKpiTtKri . 777 Judicial power of the Church warranted — System of the Church of Rome — of Protestants. LECTURES IN DIVINITY. BOOK I EVIDENCES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. The professed design of students in divinity is to prepare for a most honourable and important office, for being workers together with God in that great and benevolent scheme, by which he is restor- ing the virtue and happiness of his intelligent offspring, and for hold- ing, with credit to themselves and with advantage to the public, that station in society, by the establishment of which the wisdom of the state lends its aid to render the labours of the servants of Christ re- spectable and useful. Learning, prudence, and eloquence never can be so worthily employed as when they are devoted to the improve- ment of mankind ; and a good man will find no exertion of his talents so pleasing as that by which he endeavours to make other men such as they onght to be. We expect the breast of every student of di- vinity to be possessed with these views. If any person is devoid of them, if he despises the office of a minister of the gospel, if the char- acter of his mind is sucli as to derive no satisfaction from the employ- ments of that office, or from the object towards which they are directed, he ought to turn his attention to some other pursuit. He cannot expect to attain eminence or to enjoy comfort in a station, for which lie carries about with him an inward disqualification ; and there is an hypocrisy most disgraceful and most hurtful to his moral character in all the external appearances of preparing for that station. In attempting to lead you through that course of study which is immediately connected with your profession, I begin with what is called the Deistical Controversy, that is, with a view of the Evidences of Christianity, and of the various questions which have arisen in canvassing the branches of which they are composed. I assinne, as the ground-work of every religious system, these two great doctrines, that " God is, and that He is a rewarder of them that 3 D 1 2 INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. seek him." * When I say that I assume them, I do not mean that human reason unassisted by revelation was ever able to demonstrate these doctrines in a manner satisfactory to every understanding. But I mean that these doctrines are agreeable to the natural impressions of the human mind, and that any religious system which purifies them from the manifold errors with which they have been incorpor- ated, corresponds, in that respect, to the clear deductions of enlighten- ed reason. It is not my province to enter into any detail upon the proofs of these two doctrines of natural religion; and I am afraid to engage in discussions which have been conducted witli much erudition and metaphysical acuteness, lest I should be enticed to employ too large a portion of your time in reviewing them. Leaving you to avail yourself of the copious sources of information which writers upon this subject afford, I will not enumerate, far less attempt to appreci- ate the different modes of reasoning which have been adopted in proof of the being of God, and his moral government. But, having assumed these doctrines, I think it proper to give by way of introduc- tion to my course, a short view of the manner in which it appears to me that they may be estabhshed as the ground-work of all religion. When we say that there is a God, we mean that the universe is the work of an intelligent Being; that is, from the things which we .behold, we infer the existence of what is not the object of our senses. To show that the inference is legitimate, we must be able to state the principles upon which it proceeds, or the steps of that process by which the mind advances from the contemplation of the objects with which it is conversant, to the conviction of the existence of their Creator. These principles are found in the constitution of the human mind, in sentiments and perceptions which are natural and ultimate, which are manifested by all men upon various occasions, and which are only followed to their proper conclusion when they conduct us to the knowledge of God. One of these sentiments and perceptions ap- pears in the spirit of inquiry and investigation which universally pre- vails ; another is invariably excited by the contemplation of order, beauty and design. A spirit of inquiry and investigation has larger opportunities of exertion, it is better directed, and is applied to nobler objects with some than with others. But to a certain degree, it is common to all men, and traces of it are found amongst all ranks. Now you will observe, that this spirit of inquiry is an effort to discover the cause of what we behold. And it proceeds upon this natural perception, that every new event, every thing which we see coming into existence, every alteration in any being, is an effect. Without hesitat'on wd conclude that it has been produced, and we are solicitous to discover the cause of it. We begin our inquiries with eagerness; we pursue them as far as we have light to carry us ; and we do not rest satisfied till we arrive at something which renders farther inquiries unneces- sary. This persevering spirit of inquiry which is daily exerted about trifles finds the noblest subject of exertion in the continual changes which we behold upon the appearance of the heavenly bodies, upon • Hebrews xi. 6. INTllODUCi'ORY DISCOURSE. 8 tlie State of the attnosphore, upon the surface of the earth, and in those hidden regions whicli tin; prt)gress of art leads man to explore. To every attentive and intelligent observer these continual changes present the whole universe as an eti'ect ; and, in contemplating the succession of them, ho is led, as by the hand of natm'e, through a chain of subordinate and dependent causes to tiiat great orighial Cause from v/hom the universe dinivcd its being, upon whose operation depend all the changes of which it is susceptible, and by whose uncontrolled agency all events are directed. Even without forming any extensive observations upon the train of natural events, we are led by the same spirit of inquiry from con- sidering our own species to the knowledge of our Creator. Every man knows that he had a beginning, and that he derived his being from a succession of creatures like himself. However far back he supposes this succession to be carried, it does not afford a satisfying account of the cause of his existence. By the same principle which directs him in every other research, he is still led to seek for some original Being, who has been produced by none, and is himself the Father of all. As every man knows that he came into existence, so he has the strongest reason to believe that the whole race to which he belongs had a beginning. A tradition has in all ages been pre- served of the origin of the human race. Many nations have boasted of antiquity. None have pretended to eternity. All that their re- cords contain beyond a certain period is fabulous or doubtful. In looking back upon the history of mankind, we find them increasing in numbers, acquiring a taste for the ornaments of life, and improv- ing in the liberal arts and sciences; so that unless we adopt without proof and against all probability the supposition of successive deluges which drown in oblivion all the attainments of civilized nations, and spare only a few savage inhabitants to propagate the race, we find in the state of mankind all the marks of novelty which it must have borne, had it begun to be some few thousand years ago. But if the human race had a beginning, we unavoidably regard it as an effect of which we require some original cause ; and to the same cause from which it derived existence we must also trace the qualities by which the race is distinguished. The Being who gave it existence must be capable of imparting to it these qualities, that is, must possess them in a much higher degree. " He that planted the ear, shall he not hear ? He that formed the eye, shall he not see ? He that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know ?"* Thus, from the intelligence of men, we necessarily infer that of their Creator; while the number of intelligent beings with whom we converse cannot fail to give us the noblest idea of that original primary intelligence from which theirs is derived. While the spirit of inquiry which is natural to man thus leads us from the consciousness of our own existence to acknowledge the exis- tence of one supreme intelligent Being, the Father of Spirits, we are conducted to the same conclusion by that other natural perception which I said is invariably excited by the contemplation of order, beauty, and design. • Psalm xciv. 9, 10. 4 INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. The grandeur and beauty of external objects do not seem to affect the other animals. But they afford a certain degree of pleasure to ail men ; and in many persons a taste for tliem is so far cultivated that the pleasures of imagination constitute a large source of refined enjoyment. When the grandeur and beauty are conjoined as they seldom fail to be with utility, they do not merely afford us pleasure. We not only perceive the objects which we behold, to be grand and beautiful and useful ; but we perceive them to be effects produced by a designing cause. In viewing a complicated machine, it is the de- sign wliich strikes us. In admiring the object, we admire the mind that formed it. Without hesitation we conclude that it had a former; and although ignorant of every other circumstance respecting him, we know this much, that he is possessed of intelligence, our idea of wliich rises in proportion to the design discovered in the consti notion of the machine. By this principle, which is prior to all reasoning, and of which we can give no other account than that it is part of the constitution of the human mind, we are raised from the admiration of natural objects to a knowledge of the existence, and a sense of the perfections of Him who made them. When we contemplate the works of nature, distinguished from those of art by their superior elegance, splendour, and utility ; when we behold the sun, the moon, and the stars, performing their offices with the most perfect regularity, and although removed at an immense distance from us, contributing in a high degree to our preservation and comfort ; when we view this earth fitted as a convenient habita- tion for man, adorned with numberless beauties, and provided not only with a supply of our wants, but with every thing that can minister to our pleasure and entertainment ; when, extending our observation to the various animals that inhabit tliis globe, we find that every creature has its proper food, its proper habitation, its proper happiness ; that the meanest insect as well as the noblest animal has the several parts of its body, the senses bestowed upon it, and the degree of perfection in which it possesses them, adapted with the nicest proportion to its preservation and to the manner of life which by natural instinct it is led to pursue ; when we thus discover witliin our own sphere, numberless traces of kind and wise design, and when we learn both by experience and by observation that the works of nature, the more they are investigated and known, appear the more clearly to be parts of one great consistent whole, we are necessarily led by the constitution of our mind to believe the being of a God. Our faith does not stand in the obscure reasonings of philosophers. We but open our ej^es, and discerning, wheresoever we turn them, the traces of a wise Creator, we see and acknowledge his hand. Ttie most sup(n"ficial view is sufficient to impress our minds with a stiise of his existence. The closest scrutiny, by enlarging our acquaintance with the innumerable final causes that are found in the works of God, strengthens this impression, and confirms our first conclusions. The more tiiat we know of these works, we are the more sensible that in nature there is not only an exertion of power, but an adjustment of means to an end, which is what we call wisdom ; and an adjustment of means to the end of distributing happiness to all the creatures, which is the highest conception that we can form of goodness. INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. 5 A foundalion so deeply laid in the constitution of the human niitid for the belief of a Deity has produced an acknowledgment of his being, almost universal. The idea of God, found amongst all nations civi- lized in the smallest degree, is such that by the slightest use of our faculties we must acquire it. And accordingly the few nations who are said to have no notion of God are in a state so barbarous that they seem to have lost the perceptions and sentiments of men. The Atheist allows it to be necessary that something should have existedof itself from eternity. But he is accustomed to maintain that matter in motion is suliicient to account for all those appearances from which we infer the being of God. The absurdities of this hypo- thesis have been ably exposed. He supposes that matter is self- existent, although it has marks of dependence and imperfection in- consistent with that attribute. He supposes that matter has from eternity been in motion, that is, that motion is an essential quality of matter, although we cannot conceive of motion as any other than an accidental property of matter, impressed by some cause, and deter- mined in its direction by foreign impulses. He supposes that all the appearances of uniformity and design which surround him can pro- ceed from irregular undirected movements. And he supposes lastly, that although there is not a plant which does not spring from its seed, nor an insect which is not propagated by its kind, yet matter in motion can produce life and intelligence, properties repugnant in the highest degree to all the known properties of matter. I do not say that it is possible by reasoning to demonstrate that these suppositions are false ; and I do not know that it is wise to make the attempt. The belief of the being of God rests upon a sure foundation, upon the foundation on which He himself has rested it, if all the sup- positions by which some men have tried to set it aside contradict the natural perceptions of the human mind. These are the language in which God speaks to his creatures, a language which is heard through all the earth ; and the words of which are understood to the end of the world. By listening to that language, we learn from the various yet uniform phenomena of nature, that there is a wise Creator : we are taught by the imperfection and dependence of the soul, that it owes its being to some original cause ; and in its extensive faculties, its liberty, and power of self-motion, we discern that cause to be essen- tially different from matter. The voice of nature thus proclaims to the children of men the existence of one supreme intelligent Being, and calls them with reverence to adore the Father of their spirits. The other great doctrine which I assume as the ground-work of every religious system, is thus expressed by the Apostle to the Hebrews: "God is a re warder of them that seek Himj" mother words, the government of God is a moral government. We are here confined to an inconsiderable spot in the creation, and we are permitted to behold but a small part of the operations of Providence. It becomes us therefore to proceed in our inquiries con- cerning the Divine Government with much humility : but it docs not become us to desist. The character and the laws of that government under which we acknowledge that we live, are matters to us of the last importance ; and it is our duty thankfully to avail ourselves of the light which we enjoy. The constitution of human nature and 3* 6 INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. the state of the world are the only two subjects within the sphere of our observations, from wliich unassisted reason can discover the character of the divine government. When we attend to the constitution of human nature, the three following particulars occur as traces of a moral government. 1. The distribution of pleasure and pain in the mind of man is a moral distribution. Those affections and that conduct which we de- nominate virtuous are attended with immediate pleasure ; the opposite affections and conduct with immediate pain. The man who acts under the influence of benevolence, gratitude, a regard to justice and truth, is in a state of enjoyment. The heart which is actuated by resent- ment or malice is a stranger to joy. Here is a striking fact of a very general kind, furnishing very numerous specimens of a moral govern- ment. 2. There is a faculty in the human mind which approves of virtue, and condemns vice. It is not enough to say that righteousness is prudent because it is attended with pleasure ; that wickedness is fool- ish because it is attended with pain. Conscience, in judging of them, pronounces the one to be right, and the other to be wrong. The righteous, supported by that most deliglitful of all sentiments, the sense that he is doing his duty, proceeds with self-approbation, and reflects upon his conduct with complacence ; the wicked not imly is distracted by the conflict of various wretched passions, but acts under the perpetual conviction that he is doing what he ought not to do. — The hurry of business or the tumult of passion may, for a season, so far drown the voice of conscience, as to leav€ him at liberty to accomplish his purpose. But when his mind is cool, he perceives that in following blindly the impulse of appetite he has acted beneath the dignity of his reasonable nature ; the indulgence of malevolent affections is punished by the sentiment of remorse ; and he despises himself for every act of baseness. 3. Conscience, anticipating the future consequences of human actions, forebodes, that it shall be well with the righteous, and ill with the wicked. The righteous, although naturally modest and unassuming, not only enjoys present serenity, but looks forward with good hope. The prospect of future ease lightens every burden, and the view of distant scenes of happiness and joy holds up his head in the time of adversity. But every crime is accompanied with a sense of deserved punishment. To the man who has disregarded the admonitions of conscience, she soon begins to utter her dreadful pre- sages ; she lays open to his view the dismal scenes which lie beyond every unlawful pursuit ; and sometimes awaking with increased fury, she produces horrors that constitute a degree of wretchedness, in comparison of which all the sufferings of life do not deserve to be mentioned. The constitution of human nature being the work of God, the three particulars which have been mentioned as parts of that constitution are parts of his government. The pleasure which accompanies one set of affections and the pain which accompanies the opposite afford an instance in the goverimient of God of virtue being rewarded, and vice being punished : — the faculty which passes sentence upon human actions is a declaration from the Author of our nature of that conduct which is agreeable to Him, because it is a rule INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE. J directing his creatures to pursue a certain conduct : — and the presenti- ment of the future consequences of our behaviour is a declaration from the Author of our nature of the manner in which his govern- ment is to proceed with regard to us. The hopes and fears natural to the human mind are the language in which God foretells to man the events in which he is deeply interested. To suppose tiiat the Almighty engages his creatures in a certain course of action by de- lusive hopes and fears, is at once absurd and impious ; and if we think worthily of the Supreme Being, we cannot entertain a doubt that He, who by the constitution of human nature has declared his love of virtue and his hatred of vice, will at length appear the righteous Governor of the universe. I mentioned the state of the world as another subject within the sphere of our observation, from which unassisted reason may discover the character of the government of God. And here also we may mark three traces of a moral government. 1. It occurs, in the first place, to consider the world as the situation in which creatures, having the constitution which has been described, are placed. Acting in the presence of men, that is, of creatures con- stituted as we ourselves are, and feeling a connection with them in all the occupations of life, we experience in the sentiments of tliose around us, a farther reward and punishment than that which arises from the sense of our own minds. The faculty which passes sentence upon a man's own actions, when carried forth to the actions of others becomes a principle of esteem or contempt. The sense of good or ill desert becomes, upon the review of the conduct of others, applause or indignation. When it referred to a man's own conduct, it pointed only at what was future. When it refers to the conduct of others it becomes an active principle, and proceeds in some measure to execute the rules which it pronounces to be just. Hence the righteous is rewarded by the sentiments of his fellow- creatures. He experiences the gratitude of some, the friendship, at least the good- will of all. The wicked, on the other hand, is a stranger to esteem, and confidence, and love. His vices expose him to censure; his deceit renders him an object of distrust ; his malice creates him enemies ; according to the kind and the degree of his demerit, contempt or hatred or indignation is felt by every one who knows his character ; and even when these sentiments do not lead others to do him harm, they weaken or extinguish the emotions of sympathy ; so that his neighbours do not rejoice m his prosperity, and hardly weep over his misfortunes. Thus does God employ the general sense of mankind to encourage and reward the righteous, to correct and punish the wicked ; and thus has he constituted men in some sort the keepers of their brethren, the guardians of one another's virtue. The natural unperverted senti- ments of the human mind with regard to character and conduct are upon the side of virtue and against vice ; and the course of the world, turning in a great measure upon these sentiments, indicates a moral government. 2. A second trace in the state of the world, of the moral govern- ment of God, is the civil government by which society subsists. 8 INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE, Those wlio are employed in the admiiiislration of civil government are not supposed to act immediately from sentiment. It is expected that without regard to their own private emotions tliey shall in every case proceed according to certain known and established laws. But these laws, so far as they go, are in general consonant to the senti- ment of tlie human mind, and, like them, are favourable to the cause of virtue. The happiness, the existence of human government depends upon the protection and encouragement which it affords to virtue, and the punishment which it inflicts upon vice. The government of men, therefore, in its best, and happiest form is a moral government ; and being a part, an instrument of the government of God, it serves to intimate to us the rule according to which his Providence operates through the general system. 3. Setting aside all consideration of the opinions of the instrumen- tality of man, there appear in the world evident traces of the moral government of God. Many of the consequences of men's behaviour happen without the intervention of any agent. Of this kind are the effects which their way of life has upon their health, and much of its influence upon their fortune and situation. Effects of the same nature extend to communities of men. They derive strength and stability from the truth, moderation, temperance and pubhc spirit of the members; whereas idleness, luxury, and turbulence, while they ruin the private fortunes of many individuals, are hurtful to the com- munity ; and the general depravity of the members is the disease and weakness of the state. These effects do not arise from any civil institution. They are not a part of the political regulations which are made with different degrees of wisdom in different states ; but they may be observed in all countries. They are part of what we commonly call the course of nature ; that is, they are rewards and punishments ordained by the Lord of nature, not affected by the caprice of his subjects, and flowing immediately from the conduct of men. There arises indeed, from the present situation of human affairs, many obstructions to the full operation of these rewards and punishments. Yet the degree in which they actually take place is sufficient to ascertain the character of the government of God. In those cases where we are able to trace the causes which prevent the exact distribution of good and evil, we perceive that the very hindrances are wisely adapted to a present state. Even where we do not discern the reasons of their existence, we clearly perceive that these hindrances are accidental ; that virtue, benign and salutary in its influences, tends to produce happiness, pure and unmixed ; that vice, in its nature mischievous, tends to confusion and misery ; and we cannot avoid considering these tendencies as the voice of Him, who hath established the order of nature, declaring to those who observe and understand them, the fature condition of the righteous and the wicked. And thus in the world, we behold upon every hand of us openings of a kingdom of righteousness corresponding to what we formerly traced in the constitution of human nature. By that constitution, while reward is provided for virtue and punishment for vice, there arise in our breast the forebodings of a higher reward and a higher INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE, 9 punishment. So in the world, while there are manifold instances of a righteous distribution of good and evil, there is a tendency towards the completion of a scheme which is here but begun. This view of the government of God, which we have collected from the constitution of human nature and the state of the world, is brought to light by the religion of Jesus Christ. The language of God in his works leads us to his word in the Gospel. All our disquisitions concerning the nature of his government only prepare us for receiving those gracious discoveries, which, confirming every conclusion of right reason, resolving every doubt, and enlarging the imperfect views which belong to this the beginning of our existence, bring us perfect assurance, that, in the course of the Divine government, unlimited in extent, in duration, and in power, every hindrance shall be removed, the natural consequences of action shall be allowed, to operate, virtue shall be happy, and vice shall be miserable. Abernethy on the Attributes. Cudvvorth's Intellectual System; a magazine of learning, where all the different schemes of Atheism are combated with profound erudition and close argument. Boyle's Lectures ; a collection of the ablest defences of the great truths of religion that are to be found in any language. Having been composed in a long succession of years by men of different talents and pursuits, they furnish an abundant specimen of all the variety of argument that has ever been adduced upon the subject of which they treat. Butler's Analogy, the first chapters of which should be particularly studied in relation to the subjects of this discourse. Essays on Morality and Natural Religion, by Henry Home, Lord Kaimes. Paley's Natural Theology, the last and perhaps the most elaborate work of this author. He had here his pioneers as well as his forerunners. But his inimitable skill in arrang- ing and condensing his matter, his peculiar turn for what may be called " animal me- chanics," the aptness and the wit of his illustrations, and occasionally the warmth and the solemnity of his devotion, which, by a happy and becoming process, was rendered more animated as he drew nearer to the close of life, stamp on this work a character more valuable than originality. E 10 COLLATERAL BVIDF.XCE OF CHRISTIANITY CHAPTER I. COLLATERAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY FROM HISTORY. The ground-work which I suppose to be laid in an inquiry into the truth of the Christian rehgion, is a behefof the two great doctrines of natural religion, that God is, and that he is a re warder of them that seek him. You consider a man as led by the principles of his nature to believe that the universe is the work of an intelligent Being, although wandering very much in his apprehensions of that Being : you consider him as feeling that the government of the Creator of the world is a righteous government, although conscious that he often transgresses the law of his Maker, and very uncertain as to the method in which the sanctions of that law are to operate with regard to him : and you propose to examine whether to man in these circumstances, there was given an extraordinary revelation by the preaching of the Son of God, or whether Jesus Christ and his apostles were men who spoke and wrote according to their own measure of knowledge, and who, when they called themselves the messengers of God, assumed a character which did not belong to them. It is manifest at first sight, that such a revelation is extremely desirable to man ; and a closer investigation of the subject may show it to be desirable in such a de- gree, so necessary to the comfort and improvement of man, as to create a presumption in favour of the proofs that the Father of the human race has been pleased to grant it. But the necessity of reve- lation is a subject upon which, in my opinion, it is better not to enter at the outset ; because, if the proofs of the truth of Christianity be de- fective, the presumption arising from this necessity will not be suffi- cient to help them out ; and if they be clear and conclusive, the neces- sity of revelation will be more manifest after you proceed to examine its nature and its effects. The truth of Christianity turns upon a question of fact ; which, like every other question of the same kind, ought to be judged calmly and impartially — not by the wishes which it may be natural to form upon the subject, but by the evidence which is adduced in support of the fact. We allow the great body of the people to retain all the early prejudices which they happily acquire on the side of Christianity. — We allow its full weight to every consideration which is level to their capacity, and which corresponds to their habits ; because, what we wish to impress upon them is a practical belief of the truth of religion: and this practical belief may be sufficient to direct their conduct and to establish their hope, although it be not grounded upon critical in- quiries and logical deductions. But it is expected that the teachers of religion should be able to defend the citadel in which they are FROM HISTORY. 1 1 placed, against the attack of every enemy, and that they should btj acquainted with the quarters which are most likely to be attacked, witli the nature of the blow that is to be aimed, and the most success- ful method of warding it off. With them, therefore, belief ought to be not merely the resuh of early habit, but a conviction founded upon a close examination of evidence ; and in this, as in every other hiquiry, they ought to take the fair and safe method of arriving at the truth, by bringing to the search after it, a mind unembarrassed with any prepossession. A person who, in this state of mind, begins to examine the question of fact upon which the deistical controversy turns, will be struck with that support which the truth of Christianity receives from the whole train of history for more than 1700 years. The impartial historians of those times, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny, in passages* wliich have been often quoted and commented upon, and the exact amount of which every student of divinity ought to know, concur with Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian, the learned, hiveterate, and inquishive adver- saries of the Christian faith, in establishing beyond the possibility of doubt the following leading facts ; — that Jesus Christ, in the reign of Tiberius, was put to death ; that this man during his life fomided,and his followers after his death supported a sect, upon the reputation of performing miracles ; and that this sect spread qirtckly, and became very numerous in different parts of the Roman empire. A succession of Christian writers is extant, some of whom lived near enough the event to be witnesses of it, and all of whom published books, which must have appeared absurd to their contemporaries, if the facts upon which these books proceeded had then been known to be false. A chain of tradition can be shown by which the principal facts were transmitted in the Christian Church, The existence of our religion can be traced back to the time and place to which the beginning of it is referred ; and since that time, by the institution of a Gospel ministry, by the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and by the observance of the Lord's day, there have continued, in many parts of the world, standing memorials of the preaching, the death and the resurrection of Jesus. I begin with mentioning these things, because every literary man will perceive the advantage of taking possession of this strong ground. By plachig his foot here he is furnished with a kind of extrinsical evidence, the force of which none will deny, which cannot be said to create any unreasonable prepossession,and yet which prepares the mind for the less remote proofs of a Divine revelation. Grotius de Veritate Rel. Chris. Macknight on the Truth of the Gospel History. Addison's Evidences. Ijardner's Credibility of the Gospel History. * Sueton. Claud, cap. 25. Sueton. Nero. cap. 16. Tacit. Ann. 1. xv. 44. Plin. I. x. ep. 97. 12 AUTHENTICITY AKD GENUINENESS OF CHAPTER II. AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. The whole of that revelation which is peculiar to Christians is con- tained in the books of the New Testament ; and therefore, it appears to me that before we begin to judge of the divine mission or inspira- tion of the persons to whom these books are ascribed, we ought to satisfy ourselves that the books themselves are authentic and genuine. For even although the apostles of Jesus did really receive a commis- sion from the Son of God, yet if the books which bear their names were not written by them, or if they have been corrupted as to their substance and import since they were written, that is, if the books are not both authentic and genuine, we may be very much misled by trusting to them, notwithstanding the divine mission of their supposed authors. I oppose the word authentic to suppositions ; the 'word genuine to vitiated ; I call a book autlientic which was truly the work of the person whose name it bears ; I call a book genuine which re- mains in all material points the same as v.iren it proceeded from the author. Upon these two points, the authenticity and genuineness of the books of the New Testament, I am at present to fix your attention. Both the subjects open a Avide field, and have received nmch discus- sion. All that I can do, is to mark to you the leading circumstances which have been discussed, and with regard to which it becomes you to inform and satisfy your minds. 1. The canon of the New Testament is the collection of books written by apostles, or by persons under their direction, and received by Christians as of divine authority. This canon was not formed by any General Council, who claimed a power of deciding in this matter for the Christian Church ; but it continued to grow during all the age of the apostles, and it received frequent accessions, as the different books came to be generally recognised. It was many years after the ascension of Jesus before any of the books of the New Testament, were written. The apostles were at first entirely occupied with the labours and perils which they encountered in executing their com- mission to preach the Gospel to all nations. They found neither leisure nor occasion to write, till Christian societies were formed ; and all their writings were suggested by particular circumstances which occurred in the progress of Christianity. Some of the Epistles to the Churches were the earliest of their writings. Every Epistle was re- ceived upon unquestionable evidence by the Church to which it was sent, and in whose keeping the original manuscript remained. Copies were circulated first among the neighbouring churches, and went THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTA3IENT. 13 from them to Christian societies at a greater distance, till, by degrees, the whole Christian world, considering the superscription of the Epistle, and the manner in which it came to them, as a token of its authenticity, and relying upon the original, which they knew where to find, gave entire credit to its being the work of him whose name it bore. This is the history of the thirteen Epistles which bear the name of the apostle Paul, and of the First Epistle of Peter. Some of the other Epistles, which had not the same particular superscription, were not so easily authenticated to the whole Church, and were, upon that account, longer of being admitted into the canon. The Gospels were written by different persons, for different pur- poses ; and those Christian societies upon whose account they were originally composed, communicated them to others. The book of Acts went along with the Gospel of Luke, as a second part composed by the same author. The four Gospels, the book of Acts, and the fourteen epistles which I mentioned, very early after their publication, were known and received by the followers of Jesus in every part of the world. References are made to them by the first Christian writers ; and they have been handed down, by an uninterrupted tradition, from the days in which they appeared, to our time. Polycarp was the disciple of the Apostle John ; Irenaeus was the disciple of Polycarp ; and of the works of Irenaeus a great part is extant, in which lie quotes most of the books of the New Testament, and mentions the number of the Gospels, and the names of many of the Epistles. Origen in the third century, Eusebius and Jerome in the fourth, give us, in their voluminous works, catalogues of the books of the New Testa- ment which coincide with ours, relate fully the history of the authors of the several books, with the occasion upon which they wrote, and make large quotations from them. In the course of the first four cen- turies the greater part of the New Testament was transcribed in the writings of the Christians, and many particular passages were quoted and referred to by Celsus and Julian, in their attacks upon Christianity. From the beginning of the Church, throughout the whole Christian world, the books of the New Testament were publicly read and ex- plained to the people in their assemblies for divine worship ; and they were continually appealed to by Christian writers as the standard of faith, and the supreme judge in controversy. The Christian world was very far from being prone to receive every book which claimed inspiration. Although many were circulated under respectable names, none were ever admitted by the whole Church, or quoted hy Christian writers as of divine authority, except those which we now receive. And it was very long before some of them were universally acknowledged. When you coma to examine the subject particularly, you will find that we stand upon ground which we are fully able to defend, when we admit the Epistle to the Hebrews, the smaller Epistles, and the book of Revelation, as of equal authority with any other part of the New Testament. At the same time, the hesitation which, for several ages, was entertained in some places of the Christian world with regard to these books, is satisfying to a candid mind, because this hesitation isof itself a strong presumption, that the universal and cordial reception which was given to all the other books 4 14 AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS OF of the New Xestament, proceeded upon clear incontestable evidence of their authenticity. If, then, we readily receive, upon the authority of tradition, the History of Thucydides, the Orations of Cicero, the Dialogues of Plato, as really the composition of these immortal authors, we have much more reason to give credit to the explicit testimony which the judg- ment of contemporaries, and the acknowledgment of succeeding ages, have borne to the writers of the New Testament. There is not any ancient book with regard to which the external evidence of aiUhenti- city is so full and so various : and this variety of external evidence is confirmed to every person who is capable of judging, by the most striking internal marks of authenticity, — by numberless instances of agreement with the history of those times, which are most satisfying when they appear to be most trivial, because they form altogether a continued coincidence in points where it could not well have been studied ; a coincidence which, the more that any one is versant in the manners, the geography, and the constitution of ancient times, will bring the more entire conviction to his mind, that these books must have been written by persons living in the very country, and at the very period to which we refer those who are accounted the authors of them. Undesigned coincidences between the Acts and the Epistles are pointed out with admirable taste and judgment in Foley's IIoraB Pauhnae, which is perhaps the most cogent and convincing specimen of moral argumentation in the world ; and in the first volume of his Evidences of Christianity, — which are professedly a compilation, but so condensed and compacted, so illuminated and enforced, that it is impossible not to admire the matchless powers of the compiler's genius in turning the patient drudgery of Lardner to such account, — the authenticity of the Gospel and Acts is established. 2. Having ascertained to your own satisfaction the authenticity of the books of the New Testament, you will next proceed to inquire whether they are genuine, that is, uncorrupted. For even although they proceed at first from the apostles or evangelists whose names they bear, they may have been so altered since that time as to convey to us very false information with regard to their original contents. It does not become you to rest in the presumption that the providence ofGod,if it gave a revelation, would certainly guard so precious a gift, and transmit entire through all ages " the faith once delivered to the saints."* The analogy of nature does not support this presumption ; for the best blessings of heaven are abused by the vices or the negli- gence of those upon whom they are bestowed ; and succeeding gt neia- tions often suffer in their domestic, political, and religious interests, by . abuses of which their predecessors were guilty. It becomes a divine to know, that the manuscripts of the books of the New Testament, which were originally deposited with the Christian societies, no longer exist; that there have been the same ignorance, haste, and inaccuracy m transcribing the Gospels and Epistles, as in transcribing all other books; and that the various readings arising from theses or other sources were very early observed. Origen speaks of them in the third century. They multiplied exceedingly, as was to be expected • Jude V. 3. THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 15 from the nature of the thing, after his time, when the copies of the original MSS. became more numerous and more widely diffused ; so that Mill, in iiis splendid and valuable edition of tlic Greek Testament, has numbered 30,000 various readings. This has been a subject of much declamation and triumph to the enemies of our Christian faith. Shaftesbury, Bolingbroke, Collins, ']'olaud, Tindal, and many other deistical writers in the beginning of the last century, boasted that Christians are not in possession of a sure standard; and they bnilt upon the supposed corruption of the Greek text, an argument for tiie superiority of the light of nature above that uncertain instruction which varies continually as it passes thronghtlie hands of men. A scliolar must be aware of this difficulty, and prepared to meet it. When you come to estimate the amount of the 30,000 various readings, you will find that almost all of them are trifling changes upon letters and syllables, and that there is hardly one instance in which they affect the great doctrines of our religion. It will give 3^ou much satisfaction to observe, that the different sects into which the Christian church was early divided, watched one another ; that any great alteration of a book which, soon after its being published, had been sent over the whole world, was impossible ; that even those who corrupted Christianity have preserved the Scriptures so entire, as to transmit a full refutation of their own errors ; and that from the most vitiated copies the one faith and hope of Christians may be learned. Still, however, it is desirable that these various readings should be corrected, and it is proper that you should have a general acquaintance with the sources from which the correction of them is to be derived. These sources are four. 1. The MSS. of the New Testament which abound in Germany, France, Italy, England, and other countries of Europe. I mean MSS. written long before printing was in use, some of which, particularly Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus, are referred to one or other of the first three centuries of the Christian era. 2. The ancient versions of the New Testament, which having been made in early times from copies much nearer the original MSS. than any that we have, may be considered as in some degree vouchers of the contents of those MSS. The most respec- table of the ancient versions is the old Italic, which, we have reason to believe, was made in the first century for the benefit of those Christians in the Roman empire who understood the Latin better than any other language. It has, indeed, undergone many alterations; but so far as it can be recovered in its most ancient form, it is the surest guide, in doubtful places, to that which was the original reading. 3. A third source of correction is found in the numberless quotations from the New Testament with which the works of the Christian fathers and other early writers abound. Had they always copied exactly from books lying before them, the extent of their quotations would have rendered them as certain guides to the genuine reading, as they arc UMquestionable witnesses of the authenticity. But it cannot be denied, that as the books of the New Testament were perfectly fami- liar to them, they have often quoted from memory, and that being more careful to give the sense than the words, they differ from one another in some trivial respects, when quoting the same passage, so 16 AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS OF that their quotations cannot be applied indiscriminately to ascertain the original. 4. The last source of correction is sound chastised criticism, which, joining to the sagacious use of the most ancient MSS., versions, and quotations, cautious but skilful conjecture, determines which of the various readings is to be preferred, upon principles so clearly established, and so accurately applied as to leave no hesitation in the mind of any scholar. The canons of scripture criticism have been investigated and digested by many learned men. You will find collections of them in the Prolegomena to the larger editions of the Greek Testament. They are frequently applied by the later com- mentators, and they are the introduction to a kind of learning which, although it is apt, when prosecuted too far, to lead to what is minute and frivolous, yet is in many respects so essential that it does not become any one who professes to interpret the Scriptures to others to be entirely a stranger to it. Superficial reasoners may think it strange that so much discussion, should be necessary to ascertain the true reading of the oracles of God; and in their haste they may pronounce, that it would have been more becoming the great purpose for which these oracles were given, more kind, and more useful to man, that the originals should have been saved from destruction ; and that if the great extent of the Christian society rendered it impossible for every one to have access to them, the all-ruling providence of God should have preserved every copy that was taken from every kind of vitiation. They who thus judge, forget that there is no part of the works of creation, of the ways of Providence, or of the dispensation of grace, in which the Almighty lias done precisely that which we would have dictated to him, had he admitted us to be his counsellors, although we are generally able, by considering what he has done, to discover that his plan is more perfect, and more universally useful, than that v/hich our nairow views might have suggested as best. They forget the extent of the miracle which they ask, when they demand, that all who ever were employed in copying the New Testament should at all times have been effectually guarded by the Spirit of God from negligence, and their works kept safe from the injuries of time. And they forget, in the last place, that the very circumstance to which they object has, in tlie wisdom of God, been highly favourable to the cause of truth. The infidel has enjoyed his triumph, and has exposed his ignorance. JNIcn of erudition have been encouraged to apply their talents to a subjtct which opens so large a field for the exercise of them. Their research and their discoveries have demonstrated the futility of the objection ; and have shown that the great body of the people in every country, who are incapable of such research, may safely rest in the Scriptures a"^ they are ; and that the most scrupulous critics, by the inexhaustible sources of correction which lie open to them, may attain nearer to an absolute certainty with regard to the true reading of the books of the New Testament, than of any other ancient book in any language. If they require more, their demand is unreasonable ; for the religion of Jesus does not profess to satisfy the careless, or to overpower the obstinate, but rests its pretensions upon evidence suflicient to bring conviction to those who with honest hearts inquire after tlie truth, and are willing to exercise their reason in attempting to discover it. THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 17 Griesbach, professor at Jena in Saxony, published in 1796 the first volume of his second edi- tion of the Greek Testament, containing the four Gospels ; and in 1806, the second volume, containing the other books of the New Testament. He availed himself of the materials which sacred criticism had been collecting from the time of the publication of Mill's edition. And, adverting to all the manuscript quotations and versions which the research of a number of theological writers, in diflcrcnt parts of the world, had brought into view, he went farther than the former editors of the New Testament had done. They adhered to what is called the textus receptus, which had been established in the Elzevir edition of the Greek Testament in 1624, which is very much the same with that of the editions of Besa and Erasmus, and which is now in daily use. They only collected various readingn from manuscripts, versions, and quotations, introduced them into a preface or notes, and explained in large and learned prolegomena, the degree of credit that was due to them ; thus furnishing materials for a more correct edition of the Greek Testament, and unfolding the principles upon which these materials ought to be applied. But Griesbach proceeded himself to apply the materials, by introducing emendations into the text. This he is said, by Dr. Marsh, late Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, and now Bishop of Pe- terbro', to have done with unremitted diligence, with exti-eme caution, and with scrupulous integrity. His emendations never rest merely upon conjecture, but always upon authority which appeared to him decisive. They are printed in a smaller character than the rest of the text, or in some clear way distinguished from the received text; and when he was in any doubt, they are not introduced, but remain in the notes or margin. I have great satisfaction in saying, that in as far as I have examined Griesbach's New Testament, it does not appear to differ in any material respect from the received text; so that all Qie industry and erudition of this laborious and accurate editor serve to establish this most comfortable doctrine, that the books of the New Testament are genuine. Dr. Marsh says, that Griesbach's edition is so correct, and the prolegomena, or critical apparatus annexed to it, so full and learned, that there will be no occasion for a diflferent edition of the Greek Testament during the life of the youngest of us. I quote Dr. Maish, because in that por- tion of his lectures which has been published, he gives the most minute and ample infor- mation concerning all the editions of the Greek Testament. He mentions repeatedly, with due honour, Dr. Gerard's Institutes of Biblical Criticism, to which I refer you. Mar.-h's Lecture-, and his Translations of Michaelis's Introductions. Macknight's Preliminary Discourses in his Commentary on the Epistles. Lardiior's Credibility of the Gospel History, and Supplement to it L eland. Jortin. Hartley in vol. ."ith of Watson's Theological Tracts. Prettyman's Institutes. Paley's Horaj Paulinas, and Evidences of Christianity. 4* F 18 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. CHAPTER III. INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. The leading characteristical assertion in the books of the New Testament is, that they contain a divine revelation. Jesus said, " My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me ;"* and when he gave his apostles a commission to preach his gospel, he used these words, " As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you."t " He that heareth you, heareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth him that sent me."t This is the highest claim which any mortal can advance. It holds forth the man who makes it under the most dignified char- acter; and, if it be well founded, it involves consequences the most interesting to those who hear him. Such a claim is not to be care- lessly admitted. The grounds which it rests ought to be closely scruti- nized ; and reason cannot have a more important or honourable office than ni trying its pretensions by a fair standard. As every circumstance respecting those who advanced such a claim merits attention, the first thing which presents itself to a rational inquirer, is the manner in which the claim is made, and the state of mind which those who make it discover in their conduct, in the general style of their writings, or in particular expressions. Now, if you set yourselves to collect all the characters of enthusiasm, either from the writings of those profound moralists who have analyzed and discrimi- nated the various features of the human mind, or from the behaviour of those who, in different ages, have mistaken the fancies of a distem- pered brain for the inspiration of heaven, you will find the most marked opposition between these characters and the appearance which the books of the New Testament present. Instead of the general, indistinct, inconsistent ravings of enthusiasm, you find in these writings discourses full of sound sense and manly eloquence, connect- ed reasonings, apposite illustrations, a multitude of particular facts, a continual reference to common life, and the same useful instructive views preserved throughout. Instead of the gloom of enthusiasm, you find a spirit of clieerfulness, a disposition to associate, an accommo- dation to prejudices and opinions. Instead of credulity and vehe- ment passion, you observe in tlie writers of these books a slowness of heart to believe, a hesitation in the midst of evidence, perfect posses- sion of tlieir faculties, with calm sedate manners. Instead of the self- conceit, the turgid insolent tone of enthusiasm, you find in them a reserve, a modesty, a simplicity of expression, a disparagement of their own peculiar gifts, and a constant endeavour to magnify, in the eyes of tlieir followers, those virtues in which they themselves did ♦ J.)hn vii. IC, f John xx. 21. + Luke x. 16. INTEKNAL EVIDKNCE OF CHUISTIANITY. 19 not pretend to have any pre-eminence. The claim which they advance sits so easy and natnral upon ilieni, that tlie most critical eye cannot discern any trace of that kind of delusion which has often been exposed to public view; and they are so unlike any enthusiasts whom the world ever saw, that, as far as outward appearances are to be trusted, they "speak the words of truth and soberness."* But you will not trust to appearances. It becomes you to examine the words which they speak, and you are in possession of a standard by which these words should be tried, and without a conformity to which they cainiot be received as divine. Reason and conscience are the primary revelation which God made to man. We know assuredly that they came from the author of nature, and our appreiiensions of his perfections must indeed be very low, if we can suppose it possible that they should be contradicted by a subsequent revelation. If any system, therefore, which pretends to come from God, contain palpable absurdities, or if it enjoin actions repugnant to the moral feelings of our nature, it never can approve itself to our understandings. It is unnecessary to examine the evidences of its being divine, because no evidence can be so strong as our perception of the falsehood of that which is absurd, and of the inconsistency between the will of God and that which is immoral. When I say that a divine revelation caimot contain a palpable absurdity, I am far from meaning, that every thing contained in it must be plain and familiar, such as reason is already versant with. The revelation, in that case, would be un- necessary. Neither do I mean that every thing contained in it, although new, must be such as we are able fully to comprehend ; for many insuperable difficulties occur in the study of nature. We Iiave daily experience, that our ignorance of the manner in which a tiling exists, does not create any doubt of its existence ; and in the ordinary business of life, we admit without hesitation, the truth of facts which, at the time we admit them, are to us unaccountable. The presump- tion is, that if a revelation be given, it will contain more facts of the same kind ; and it addresses you as reasonable creatures, if it require you, in judging of the facts which it proposes to your belief, to follow out the same principles upon which you are accustomed to proceed with regard to the facts which you see or hear. If the books of the New Testament be tried with this caution by the standard of reason, they will not be found to contain any of that contradiction which might entitle you to reject them before you examine their evidence. There are doctrines, to the full apprehension of which our limited faculties are inadequate ; and there has been much perplexity and misapprehension in the presumptuous attempts to explain these doc- trines. But the manner in wliich the books themselves state the doctrines, cannot appear to any philosophical mind to involve an absurdity. The system of religion and morality which they deliver is every way worthy of God. It corresponds to all the discoveries which the most enlightened reason has made with regard to the nature and the will of God; and it comprehends all the duties which are dictated by conscience or clearly suggested by the love of order. The {o\v objections which have been made to the morality of the • Acte xKvi. 25, 20 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OP CHRISTIANITY. gospel, as being defective in some points, by not enjoining patriotism or friendship, or too rigorous in others, admit of so clear and so easy a solution, that nothing but the desire of finding fault, joined to the diliiculty of discovering any exceptionable circumstance, could have drawn remarks so frivolous from the authors in whose works they appear. You may, then, without much trouble, satisfy yourselves that neither the manner in which the writers of the New Testament advance their claim, nor the contentsof their books, aftbrd any reason for rejecting that claim instantly, without examining the evidence. — I do not say that this affords any proof of a divine revelation ; for a system may be rational and moral without being divine. This is only a pre-requisite, which every person to whom a system is pro- posed under that character has a title to demand. But we state the matter very imperfectly when we say, that there is nothing in the manner or the contents of these books which deserves an immediate rejection. A closer attention to the subject not only renders it clear that they may come from God, but suggests many strong presumptions that they cannot be the work of men. These presumptions make up what is called the internal evidence of Christianity. The first branch of this internal evidence is the manifest superiority of that system of religion and morality which is contained in the books of the New Testament, above any that was ever delivered to the world before. Here a Christian divine derives a most important advantage from an intimate acquaintance with the ancient heathen philosophers. He ought not to take upon trust the accounts of their discoveries which succeeding writers have copied from one another. But setting that which they taught, over against the discourses of Jesus Christ, and the writings of his Apostles, he ought to see with his own eyes the force of that argument which arises from the com- parison. Do not think yourselves obliged to disparage the Avritings of the heathen moralists. The effort which they made to raise their minds above the grovelling superstition in which they were born \vas honourable to themselves ; it was useful to their disciples, and it scattered some rays of light through the world. It does not become a scholar, who is daily reaping instruction and entertainment from their works, to deny them any part of that applause which is their due ; and it is not necessary for a Christian. You may safely allow that they were very much superior in the knowledge of religion and morality to their countrymen ; and yet, when you take those philoso- phers who lived before the Christian era, and compare their writings with the books of the New Testament, the disparity appears most striking. The views of God given in these books are not only more sub- lime than those which occasional passages in the writings of tiie philo- sophers discover, but are purified from the alloy which abounds in them, and are at once consistent with, and apposite to the condition of man. Religion is here uniformly applied to encourage man in the discharge of his duty, to support him under the trials of life, and to cherish every good affection. To love God with all our heart, and strength, and soul, and mind, and to love our neighbour as ourselves, the two conmiandments of the Gospel, are the most luminous and compre- hensive prmciples of morality that ever were taught. The particuiur INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. 21 precepts, which, although not systematically deduced, are but the unfolding of those principles, form the heart, regulate the conduct, descend into every relation, and constitute the most perfect and refined morality, — a morality, not elevated above the concerns or occasions of ordinary men, but sound and practical, which renders the members of society useful, agreeable, and respectable, and at the same time carries them forward by the progressive improvement of their nature to a higher state of being. The precepts themselves are short, ex- pressive, and simple, easily retained, and easily applied ; and they are enforced by all those motives which have the greatest powei over the human mind. That future life, to which good men in every age had looked forward with an anxious wish, is brought to light in these books. There is not in them the conjecture, the hesitation, the embarrassment which had entered into the language of the wisest philosophers upon this subject. But there is an explicit declaration, delivered in a tone of authority which becomes that Being who can order the condition of his creatures, that this is a season of trial, that there will hereafter be a time of recompense, and that the conduct of men upon earth is to produce everlasting consequences with regard to their future condition. To the fears, of which a being who is conscious of repeated transgressions cannot divest himself, no other system had applied any remedy but the repetition of unavailing sacrifices. These books alone disclose a scheme of Providence adapted to the condition of sinners, announced, introduced and conducted with a solemnity corresponding to its importance, admirably fitted in all its parts, sup- posing it to be true, to revive the hopes of the penitent, to restore the dignity, the purity, and happiness of the intelligent creation, and thus to repair that degeneracy which all writers have lamented, of which every man has experience, and to the cure of which all human means had proved inadequate. This grand idea, which is characteristical of the books of the New Testament, completes their superiority above every other system, and gives a peculiar kind of sublimity to both the religion and the morality of the Gospel. The second branch of the internal evidence of Christianity arises from the condition of those men in whose writings this superior system appears. We can trace a progress in ancient philosophy ; we see the principles of science arising out of the occupation of men, collected, improved, abused ; and we can mark the effect which both the improvement and the abuse had in producing that degree of perfection which they attained. To every person versant in the history of ancient philosophy, Socrates must appear an extraordinary man. — Yet the eminence of Socrates forms only a stage in the progress of his countrymen. His disciples, who have recorded his discourses, were men placed in a most favourable situation for polishing and enlarging their minds ; and the Roman philosophers trod in their steps. But, if the books of the New Testament be authentic, the writers who have delivered to us this superior system, were men born in a mean condition, without any advantages of education, and with strong national prejudices, which the low habits formed by their occupations could not fail to strengthen. They have interwoven in their works their history and their manner of thinking. The obscurity of their station is vouched by contemporary writers, and it was one of the 22 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITV. reproaches thrown upon the Gospel by its earhest adversaries. Yet the conceptions of these mean men upon the most important subjects, far transcend the continued efforts of ancient philosophy ; and the sages of Greece and Rome appear as children when compared with the fishermen of Gahlee. From men, wliose minds we cannot suppose to have been seasoned with any other notions of divine things than those whiclithey derived from the teaching of the Pharisees, who had obscured the law by their traditions, and loaded it with ceremonies, there arose a pure and spiritual religion. From men, educated in the narrowness and bigotry of the Jewish spirit, there arose a religion which enjoins universal benevolence, a scheme for diffusing the knowledge of the true God over the whole earth, and forming a church out of all the nations under heaven. The divine plan of blessing the human race, in turning them from their iniquity, originat- ed from a little district, — was adopted, not by the whole tribe as a method of retrieving their ancient honours, but by a few individuals, in opposition to public authority, — and was prosecuted with zeal and activity under every disadvantage and discouragement. When his contemporaries heard Jesus speak, they said, "Whence hath this man wisdom? How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?"* When the Jewish council heard Peter and John, they marvelled, because they knew that they were ignorant and unlearned men ;"t and to every candid inquirer, the superiority of that system, and the magnificence of that plan contained in the books of the New Testa- ment, when compared with the natural opportunities of those from whom they proceed, must appear the most inexplicable phenomenon in the history of the human mind, unless we admit the truth of their claim. A third branch of the internal evidence of Christianity arises from the character of Jesus Christ. It is often said with much truth, that the gospel has the peculiar excellence of proposing in the character of its author, an example of all its precepts. That character may also be stated as one branch of the internal evidence of Christianity, whether you consider Jesus as a teacher, or as a man. His manner of teaching was most dignified and most winning. " Never man spake like this man." He taught by parable, by action, and by plain discourse. Out of familiar scenes, out of the objects which surrounded him, and the intercourse of social life, he extracted the most pleasing and useful instruction. He repelled the attacks of his enemies with a gentleness which disarmed, and a wisdom which confounded their malice. There was a plainness, yet a depth in all his sayings. He was tender, persuasive, or severe, according to circumstances ; and the discourse, which seemed to have been dictated to him merely b/ the occasion, is found to convey lasting and valuable counsel to posterity. His character as a man, is allowed to be the most perfect which the world ever saw. All the virtues of which we can form a conception, were united in him with a more exact harmony, and shone with a lustre more bright and more natural, than in any of the sons of men. His descending from the glories of heaven, assuming the weakness of human nature, and voluntarily submitting to all the calamities * Matt, xiii, 54. John vii. 15. f Acts iv. 13. INTERNAL EVIDENCE OP CHRISTIANITY. 28 which he endured for the sake of men, exhibits a degree of benevolence, of magnanimity, and patience, which far exceeds the conception that Plato formed of the most tried and perfect virtue. The majesty of his divine nature is blended with the fellow feehng and condescension imphed in his office ; and although the history of mankind did not afford any model that could here be followed, this singular character is supported throughout, and there is not any one of the words or actions ascribed to him, which does not appear to the most correct taste to become the man Christ Jesus. It is not possible that a manner of teaching, so infinitely superior to that of the Scribesand Pharisees, or that a character so extraordinary, so godUke, so consistent, could have been invented by the fishermen of Galilee. Admit only that the books of the New Testament are authentic, and you must allow that the authors of them drew Jesus Christ from the life. And how do they draw him ? Not in the language of fiction, with swoln panegyric, with a laborious effort to number his deeds, and to record all his sayings, but in the most natural artless manner. Four of his disciples, not many years after his death, when every circumstance could easily be investigated, write a short history of his life. Without attempting to exhaust the subject, without studying to coincide with one another, without directing your attention to the shining parts of his history, or marking any contrast between him and other men, they leave you, from a few facts, to gather the character of the man whom they had followed. Thus you learn his innocence not from their protestations, but from the whole complexion of his life ; from the declaration of the judge who condemned him ; of the centu- rion wlio attended his execution ; of a traitor, who having been admit- ted into his family, was a witness of his most retired actions, who had no tie of affection, of delicacy, or consistency, to restrain him from divulging the whole truth, and who might have pleaded the secret wickedness of his master as an apology for his own baseness, who would have been amply repaid for his information, and yet who died with these words in his mouth, " I have sinned, in that I have be- trayed the innocent blood."* Had Judas borne no such testimony, an appeal to him was the most unsafe method in which the writers of this history could attest the innocence of their master. But if the wisdom of God had ordained, that even in the family of Jesus the wrath of his enemies should thus praise him, it was the most natural for one of the evangelists to record so striking a circumstance : and I mention it here, only as a specimen of the manner in which the char- acter of Jesus is drawn, not by the colouring of a skilful pencil, but by a continual reference to facts, which to impostors are of difficult in- vention, and of easy detection, but which, to those who exhibit a real character, are the most natural, the most delightful, and the most effectual method of making their friend known. " Shall we say," writes Rousseau, no uniform champion for the cause of Christianity, " shall we say that the history of the gospel is invented at pleasure ? No. It is not thus that men invent. It would be more inconceivable that a number of men had in concert produced this book from their own imaginations, than it is that one man has furnished the subject • Matt, xxvii. 4. 24 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OP CHRISTIANITY. of it. The morality of the gospel, and its general tone, were beyond the conception of Jewish authors ; and the history of Jesus Christ has marks of truth so palpable, so striking, and so perfectly inimitable, that its inventor would excite our admiration more than its hero."* A fourth branch of the internal evidence of Christianity arises from the characters of the apostles of Jesus as drawn in their own writings. Their condition renders the superiority of their doctrine inexplicable, without admitting a divine revelation : their character gives the highest credibility to their pretensions. We seldom read the work of any person, without forming some apprehension of his character ; and if his work represent him as engaged in a succession of trials, pouring forth the sentiments of his heart, and holding, in interesting situations, much intercourse with his fellow creatures, we contract an intimate acquaintance with him before we are done, and we are able to collect from numberless circumstances, whether he be at pains to disguise himself from us, or whether he be really such a man as he wishes to appear. No scene ever was more interesting to the actors, than that in which the writings of the apostles of Jesus exhibit them ; and the gospels and epistles taken together, aflbrd to every attentive reader a complete display of their character. We said, that they appear from their writings devoid of enthusiasm, cool and collected. Yet this coolness is removed at the greatest distance from every mark of im- posture. They are at no pains to disguise their infirmhies ; all their prejudices shine through their narration ; and they do not assume to themselves any merit for having abandoned them. We see light opening slowly upon their minds, their hopes disappointed, and them- selves conducted into scenes very different from those which they had figured. " We trusted," said they, after the death of their master, " that it was he which should have redeemed Israel. "t Yet it is not long before they become firm, and cheerful, and resolute. Not over- awed by the threatenings of the magistrates, nor shaken by the per- secutions which they endured from their countrymen, they devoted their lives to the generous undertaking of spreading through the world the knowledge of that religion which they had embraced. Appearing as the servants of another, they disclaim the honours which their followers were disposed to pay them ; they uniformly inculcate quiet inoflensive manners, and a submission to civil authority ; and labour- ing with their hands for the supply of their necessities, they stand forth as patterns of humility and self-denial. The churches to which they write, are the witnesses to posterity of their holy unblameable conduct ; their sincerity and zeal breathe through all their epistles ; and, when you read their writings, you behold the most illustrious example of disinterested beneficence, that exalted love of mankind, which made them forego every private consideration, in order to pro- mote the virtue and happiness of those to whom they were sent. They had differences amongst themselves, which they are at no pains to conceal ; yet they remained united in the same cause. They had personal enemies in the churches which they planted ; yet they were not afraid to reprove, to censure, to excommunicate ; and, in the im- mediate prospect of death, they continued their labour of love. • Rousseau, Emile, ii. 98. •}• Luke xxiv. 21. INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. 25 Such is the character of the apostles of Jesus, as it appears in their authentic writings, not drawn by themselves, but collected from the facts which they relate, and the letters which they address to those who knew them. It is a character so far raised above the ordinary exertions of mortals, and so diametrically opposite to the Jewish spirit, that we naturally search for some divine cause of its being formed. We are led to consider its existence as a pledge of the truth of that high claim which such men appear not unworthy to make ; and this assurance of their veracity which we derive from their conduct, disposes our minds to attend to that external evidence which they offer to adduce. I have thus stated what appear to me the principal parts of the internal evidence of Christianity. I have not mentioned the style or composition of the books of the New Testament, because, although I am of opinion that there are in them instances of sublimity, of tender- ness, and of manly eloquence, which are not to be equalled by any human composition, and although the mixture of dignity and sim- plicity which characterizes these books is most worthy of the author and the subject of them, yet this is a matter of taste, a kind of senti- mental proof which will not reach the understandings of all, and where an affirmation may be answered by a denial. The only evi- dence which Mahomet adduced for his divine mission, was the inimi- table excellence of his Koran. Produce me, said he, a single chapter equal to this book, and I renounce my claim. We are not driven to this necessity ; and therefore, although every person of true taste reads with the highest admiration many parts of the New Testament, al- though every divine ought to cultivate a taste for the sacred classics, and has often occasion to illustrate their beauties, it is better to rest the evidence of our religion upon arguments less controvertible. — Neither have I mentioned that inward conviction which the excellence of the matter, the grace of the promises, and the awful ness of the threatenings, produce on every mind disposed by the influence of heaven to receive the truth. This is the witness of the S})irit, the highest and most satisfying evidence of divine revelation ; the gift of God, for which we pray, and which every one who asks with a good and honest heart is encouraged to expect. But this witness within ourselves, although it removes every shadow of doubt from our own breasts, cannot be stated to others. They are to be convinced, not by our feelings but by their own ; and the truth of that fact, upon which the Deistical controversy turns, must be established by arguments which every understanding may apprehend, and with regard to which the experience of one man cannot be opposed to the experience of another. Of this kind are the points which I have stated ; the superior excellence of that system contained in the books of the New Testament, taken in conjunction v/ith the condition of those whom we know to be the authors of them, the character of Jesus Christ, as drawn by his disciples, and their own character as it ai)pears from their writings. 1 do not say that these arguments will have erjual force with all ; but I say that they are fitted by their nature to make an impression upon every understanding which considers them with attention and candour. I allow that they form only a presumptive evidence for the high claim advanced in these books ; and I consider 5 G 26 INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. the external evidence of Christianity as absohitely necessary to estab- lish our faith. But I have called your attention particularly to the various branches of this internal evidence, not only because the result of the four taken together appears to me to form a very strong presump- tion, but also because they constitute a principal part of the study of a divine. By dwelling upon these branches — by reading with care the many excellent books which treat of them, — and, above all, by search- ing the Scriptures with a special view to perceive the force of this inter- nal evidence, your sense of the excellence of Christianity is confirmed ; your hearts are made better, and you acquire the most useful furniture for those public ministrations in which it will be more your business to confirm them that believe, than to convince the gainsayers. The several points which I have stated perpetually recur in our discourses to the people; our lectures and our sermons are full of them; and therefore, the more extensive and various our information is with regard to these points, and the deeper the impression which the frequent contemplation of them has made upon our own minds, we are the better able to magnify, in the eyes of those for whose sakes we labour, the un- searchable riches of the Gospel, and to build them up in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation. Newcomb on the Character of our Saviour. Leechman's Sermons, Conybeare's Answer to Tindal. L eland on the Advantages of the Christian Revelation. Leland's View of the Deistical Writers. Duchal's Sermons. Jenyns on the Internal Evidences of Christianity. Macknight on the Truth of the Gospel History. Paley's Exidences of Christianity, Vol. II. Bishop Porteus' Summary of the Evidences of Christianity. DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. 27 CHAPTER IV. DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OP CHRISTIANITY. Having satisfied your minds that the books of the New Testament are authentic and genuine, that they contain nothing upon account of which they deserve immediately to be rejected, and that their con- tents afford a very strong presumption of their being what they profess to be, a revelation from God to man, it is natural next to inquire what is the direct evidence in support of this presumption ; for, in a matter of such infinite importance, it is not desirable to rest entirely upon pre- sumptions: and it is not to be supposed that the strongest evidence which the nature of the case admits will be Avithheld. The Gospel professes to offer such evidence ; and our Lord distinguishes most accurately between the amount of that presumptive evidence which arises from the excellence of Christianity, and the force of that direct proof which he brought. Of the presumptive evidence he thus speaks : " If any man will do the will of God, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God."* i. e. Every man of an honest mind will infer from the nature of my doctrine, that it is of Divine origin. But of the direct proof he says : " If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin. But now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father." " If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not : But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works."! To the direct proof he constantly appeals : " The works which the Father hath given me to do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me."t He declares, that the same works which he did, and greater than them, should his servants do :§ And what these works are, we learn from his answer to the disciples of John the Baptist, who brought to him this question, " Art thou he that should come ?" " Go," said he, " and show John again those things which ye do hear and see. The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk ; the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised." II The Gospel then professes to be received as a divine reve- lation upon the footing of miracles ; and, therefore, every person who examines into the truth of our religion, ought to have a clear appre- hension of the nature of that claim. That I may not pass hurriedly over so important a subject, I have been led to divide my discourse upon miracles into three parts : in the first of which I shall state the force of that argument for the truth of Christianity which arises from the miracles of Jesus recorded in the New Testament. •Johnvii. 17. f John xv. 24 ; x. 37, 38, t John v, 36. §Johnxiv. 12. I Matt. xi. 4, 5. 28 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE Section I. All that we know of the Ahiiighty is gathered from his works. He speaks to us by tlie etfects whicti he produces ; and the signatures of power, wisdom, and goodness, which appear in the objects around us, are the language in wliich God teaches man the knowledge of himself. From these objects we learn the providence as well as the existence of God ; because, while the objects are in themselves great and stupendous, many of them appear to us in motion, and through the whole of nature, we observe operations which indicate not only the original exertions, but also the continued agency of a supreme in- visible power. These operations are not desultory. By experience and information we are able to trace a certain regular course, accord- ing to which the Almighty exercises his power throughout the uni- verse ; and all the business of life proceeds upon the supposition of the uniformity of his operations. We are often, indeed, reminded that our experience and information are very limited. Extraordinary ap- pearances at particular seasons astonish the nations of the earth : new powers of nature unfold themselves in the progress of our discoveries ; and the accumulation of facts collected and arranged by successive generations, serves to enlarge our conceptions of the greatness and the order of that system to which we belong. But although we do not pretend to be acquainted with the whole course of nature, yet the more that we know, we are the more confirmed in the belief that there is an established course : and every true philosopher is encour- aged by the fruit of his own researches to entertain the hope, that some future age will be able to reconcile with that course, appearances which his ignorance is at present unable to explain. Although the business of life and the speculations of philosophy proceed upon the uniformity of the course of nature, yet it cannot be understood by those who believe in the existence of a Supreme In- telligent Being, that this uniformity excludes his interposition when- soever he sees meet to interpose. We use the phrase, laws of nature, to express the method in which, according to our observation, the Almighty usually operates. We call them laws, because they are independent of us, because they serve to account for the most dis- cordant phenomena, and because the knowledge of them gives us a certain command over nature. But it would be an abuse of language to infer from their being called laws of nature, that they bind him who established them. It would be recurring to the principles of atheism, to fate, and blind necessity, to say that the author of nature is obliged to act in the manner in which he usually acts ; and that he cannot, in any given circumstances, depart from the course which we observe. The departure, indeed, is to us a novelty. We have no principles by which we can foresee its approach, or form any conjec- ture with regard to the measure and the end of it. But if we conceive worthily of the Ruler of the universe, we shall believe that all these departures entered into the great plan which he formed in the begin- ning ; that they were ordained and arranged by him ; and that they arise at the time which he appointed, and fulfil the purposes of his wisdom. OF CHRISTIANITY. 29 There is not then any mutability or weakness in those occasional interpositions which seem to us to suspend the laws and to alter the course of nature. The Almighty Being, who called the universe out of nothing, whose creating hand gave a beginning to the course of nature, and whose will must be independent of that which he himself produced, acts for wise ends, and at particular seasons, not in that manner which he has enabled us to trace, but in another manner con- cerning which he has not furnished us with the means of forming any expectation, and which is resolvable merely into his good pleasure. The one manner is his ordinary administration, under which his reasonable offspring enjoy security, advance in the knowledge of nature, and receive much instruction : the other manner is his extra- ordinary administration, which, although foreseen by him as a part of the scheme of his government, appears strange to his intelligent creatures, but which, by this strangeness, may promote purposes, to them most important and salutary. It may rouse their attention to the natural proofs of the being and perfections of God ; it may alibrd a practical confutation of the scepticism and materialism to which false philosophy often leads; and, rebuking the pride and the security of man, may teach the nations to know that the Lord God reignetii "in heaven and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places."* To such moral purposes as these, any alteration of the course of nature, by the immediate interposition of the Almighty, may be sub- servient ; and no man will presume to say that our limited faculties can assign all the reasons which may induce the Almighty thus to inter- pose. But we can clearly discern one most important end which may be promoted by those alterations of the course of nature, in which the agency of men, or other visible ministers of the divhie power, is employed. The circumstances of the intelligent creation may render it highly expedient that, in addition to that original revelation of the nature and the will of God which they enjoy by the light of reason, there should be superadded an extraordinary revelation, to remove the errors which had obscured their knowledge, to enforce the practice of tlieir duty, or to revive and extend their hopes. The wisest ancient philosopliers wished for a divine revelation : and to any one who examines the state of the old heathen world in respect of religion and morality, it cannot appear unworthy of the Father of his creatures to bestow such a blessing. This revelation, supposing it to be given, miy cither be imparted to every individual mind, or be confined to a few chosen persons, vested with a commission to communicate the br-nefits of it to the rest of the world. It is certainly possible for the Fath'r of spirits to act upon every individual mind so as to give that mind the impression of an extraordinary revelation : it is as easy for the Father of spirits to do this, as to act upon a [ew minds. But, in this case, departures from the established course of nature would be multiplied without end. In the illumination of every individual, thare would be an immediate extraordinary interposition of the Al- mighty. But extraordinary inter})ositions so frequent would lose their nature, so as to be confi)unded with the ordinary light of reason • Psalm cxxxv. 6. 30 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE and conscience : or if they were so striking as to be, in every case, clearly discriminated, they would subdue the understanding, and overawe the whole soul, so as to extort, by the feeling of tlie imme- diate presence of the Creator, that submission and obedience which it is the character of a rational agent to yield with deliberation and from choice. It appears, therefore, more consistent with the simplicity of nature, and with the character of man, that a few persons should be ordained the instruments of conveying a divine revelation to their fellow-creatures ; aud that the extraordinary circumstances which must attend the giving such a revelation should be confined to them. But it is not enough that these persons feel the impression of a divine revelation upon their own minds : it is not enough that, in their com- munications with their fellow-creatures, they appear to be possessed of superior knowledge, and more enlarged views : it is possible that their knowledge and views may have been derived from some natural source ; and we require a clear indisputable mark to authenticate the singular and important commission which they profess to bear. It were presumptuous in us to say what are the marks of such a com- mission which the Almighty can give ; for our knowledge of what He can do, is chiefly derived from our observation of what He has done. But we may say, that, according to our experience of the divine pro- cedure, there can be no mark of a divine commission more striking and more incontrovertible, than that the persons who bear it should have the privilege of altering the course of nature by a word of their mouths. The revelation made to their minds is invisible ; and all the outward appearances of it may be delusive. But extraordinary works, beyond the power of man, performed by them, are a sensible outward sign of a power which can be derived from God alone. If he has invested them with this power, it is not incredible that he has made a revelation to their minds ; and if they constantly appeal to the M'-orks, which are the signs of the power, as the evidence of the in- visible revelation, and of the commission with which it was accom- panied, then we must either believe that they have such a commission, or we are driven to the horrid supposition that God is the author of a falsehood, and conspires with these men to deceive his creatures. When I call the extraordinary works performed by these men, the sign of a power derived from God, you recollect that all the language which we interpret consists of signs ; i. e. objects and operations which fall under our senses, employed to indicate that which is unseen. What are the looks, the words, and tlie actions of onr fellow crea- tures, but signs of that internal disposition which is liidden from our view ? What are the appearances which bodies exhibit to our senses, but signs of the inward qnalities which produce these appearances? What are the works of nature, but signs of that supreme intelligence, " whom no man hath seen at any time?"* Upon this principle, ail those events and operations, beyond the compass of human power, which happen according to the established course of nature, form part of the foundations of Natural Religion; and any person who foretells or conducts them, only discovers his acquaintance with ihat course, and his sagacity in applyhig what we call the laws of nature. Upon * John i. IS. OF CHRISTIANIxr. 31 the same principle, all^those events and operations which happen in opposition to the estabUshed course of nature, imply an exertion of the same power which established that course, because they counter- act it; and any person who, by a word, produces such events and operations, discovers that this power is committed to him. To com- mand the sun to run his race until the time of his going down, and to connnand him to stand still about a whole day, as in the valley of Gibeon in the time of Joshua,* are two commands which destroy one another; and therefore, if we believe that the will of the Almighty Killer of the universe produces an uniform obedience to the first, we must believe that the obedience which, upon one occasion, was yielded to the second, was the etlect of his will also. As no creature can stop the working of his hand, every interruption in that course according to wiiich he usually operates, happens by his permission ; and the power of altering the course of nature, by whomsoever it be exerted, must be derived from the Lord of nature. This is the reasoning upon which we proceed, when we argue for the trulh of a revelation, from extraordinary works performed by those through whom it is communicated ; and here we see the im- portant purpose which the Almighty promotes by employing the agency of men to change the order of nature. Those changes which proceed immediately from his hand, however well fitted to impress his creatures with a sense of his sovereignty, do not of themselves prove any new proposition, because their connexion with that propo- sition is not manifest. But, when visible agents perform works be- yond the power of man, and contrary to the course of nature, they give a sign of the interposition of the Almighty, which, being applied by their declaration to the doctrine which they teach, becomes a vouclier of the truth of what they say. To works of this kind, the term miracles is properly applied ; and they form what has been called the seal of heaven, implying that delegation of the sovereign authority of the Lord of all, which appears to be reserved in the con- duct of providence as the credential of those to whom a divine com- mission is at any time granted. This was the rod put into the hand of Moses, wherewith to do signs and wonders, that Pharaoh and the children of Israel might believe that the Lord God had sent him. This was the sign given to Elijah, that it miglit be known that he was a man of God ; and this was the witness which the Father bore to " Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God by miracles, which God did by him in the midst of the people,"t and to the apostles of Jesus who went forth to preach the Gospel, "the Lord working with them, and confirming the words by signs following.''^ The nature of the revelation contained in the books of the New Testament afTordsa very strong presumptive proof that it comes from God ; whilst t'le works done by Jesus and his Apostles are the direct proof; and tlie two proofs conspire with tlie most perfect harmony. The i)resuin|)tive proof explains the importance and the dignity of that occasion upon which the Almiglity was pleased to make the inter- position, of winch these works are the sign : The direct proof accounts for that transccndont excellence, in the doctrine and the character of • Toshua X. 12—14. f Acts ii. 23. \ Mark xvi. 29 32 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE the author of this system, whicli, upon the supposition of its being of human origin, appeared to be inexplicable; and thus the internal and external evidence of Christianity, by the aid which they lend to one another, make us "ready to give an answer to every man that asketli a reason of the hope that is in us."* ' We have found, that the reasoning involved in the argument from miracles, proceeds upon the same principles by which a sound theist infers the being and perfections of God ; in both cases, we discover God by his works, which are to us the signs of his agency. This analogy between the proofs of natural and revealed religion is very much illustrated by considering the particular miracles recorded in the Gospel. When we investigate the evidences of natural religion, we find that any works manifestly exceeding human power would lead us, in the course of fair -reasoning, to a Being antecedent to the hu- man race, superior to them in strength, and independent of them in the mode of his existence. But it is the transcendent grandeur oi those works which we behold, their inimitable beauty, their endless variety, their harmony, and utility ; it is this infinite superiority of the works of nature above the works of art, which renders the argument completely satisfying, and leaves no doubt in our minds, either of the power or of the moral character of that Being from whom they pro- ceed. In like manner, although, in stating the argument from mira- cles in support of the Gospel, we have reasoned fairly upon this sim- ple principle, that they are interruptions of the course of nature, yet, when we come to consider those particular interruptions upon which the Gospel founds its claim, we perceive that their nature furnishes a very strong confirmation of the general argument, and that, like the other works of God, they proclaim their Author. In Him who ruled the raging of the sea and stilled the tempest, we recognise the Lord of the universe. In that command which gave life to the dead, we recognise the author of life. In the works of Him who, by a word of his mouth, cured the most inveterate diseases, unstopped the ears which had never admitted a sound, opened the eyes which had never seen the light, conferred upon the most distract- ed mind the exercise of reason, and restored the withered, maimed, distorted limb, we recognise the Former of our bodies and the Father of our spirits. This is the very power by which all things consist, the energy of Him " in whom we live, and move, and have our being."f The miracles of the Gospel were performed without pre- paration or concert ; they were instantaneous in the manner of being produced, yet their etfects were permanent; and, like the works of nature, although they came without effort from the hands of the workman, they bore to be examined by the nicest eye. The;e does not ap[icar in them that poverty which marks all human exertions; neither the strength nor the skill of Him who did them seemed to be exhausted ; but there was a fulness of power, a multiplicity, a di- versity, a readiness in the exercise of it, by which they resemble the riches of God that replenish the earth. Yet they were free from parade and ostentation. There were no attempts to dazzle, no anxie- ty to set otf every work to the best advantage, no waste of exertion, • 1 Peter iii. 15.' f Acts xviii. 28. OP CHRISTIANITY. 33 no frivolous accompaniments ; but a sobriety, a decorum, all the dig- nified simplicity of nature. The extraordinary power which appear- ed in the miracles of the gospel was employed not to hurt or to terrify, but to heal, to comfort, and to bless. The gracious purpose to which they ministered declared their divine origin ; and they who beheld a man who had the command of nature, and " who went about doing good,'"* dispensing with a bountiful hand the gifts of heaven, hghten- ing the burdens of human life, and accompanying every exeicise of his power with a display of tenderness, condescension, and love, were taught to venerate the messenger, and the "express image" of that Al- mighty Lord whose kingdom excels at once in majesty and in grace. As the religion which these miracles were wrought to attest, is in every respect worthy of God, so they were selected with divine wisdom to ilhistrate the peculiar doctrines of that religion ; and in the admira- ble fitness with which the nature of the proof is accommodated to the nature of the thing to be proved, we have an instance of tlie same kind with many which the creation affords of the perfection of the divine workmanship. Jesus came preaching forgiveness of sins ; and he brought with him a sensible sign of his having received a commis- sion to bestow this invisible gift. Disease was introduced into the world by sin. Jesus therefore cured all manner of disease that we might know that he had power to forgive sins also. His being able to re- move, not by the slow uncertain applications of human art, but instant- ly by a word of his mouth spoken at any distance, those temporal mala- dies which are the present visible fruits of sin, was an assurance to the world of his being able to remove the spiritual evils which flow from the same source. It was a specimen, a symbolical representation of his character as physician of souls. Jesus was that seed of the woman who was to bruise the head of the serpent, and he gave in his miracles a sensible sign of the fall of Satan, The influence which this ad- versary of mankind in every age exercises over the minds of men, was in that age connected with a degree of power over their bodies. It was the general belief in Judea, that certain diseases proceeded from the possession which his emissaries took of the human body. To the Jews therefore, the casting out devils was an ocular demonstration that Jesus was able to destroy the works of the devil. It was the beguming of the triumphs of this mighty prince, a trophy which he brought from the land of the enemy, to assure his followers of a complete victory. I have bound the strong ma)i. Do you ask a proof? See, I enter his house and spoil his ffoods. I set free the mind and conscience which he had enslaved. My people will feel their freedom and will need no foreign proof. But does the world require one ? See, by the finger of God, I set free those bodies which Satan torments. His raising the dead was a practical confirmation of that new doctrine of his religion, that the hour is coming when they who are in their graves, shall hear his voice, and shall come forth to the resurrection. You cannot say that the thing is impossible ; for you see in his miracles a sample of that almighty power which siiall quicken thom that sleep in the dust, a sensible sign that Jesus " hath abolished death," and is able to " ransom his people from the power of the grave. "t • Acts X. .38. t 2 Tim. i. 1 0 ; Hos. xiii. 14. H 34 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE Other miracles of Jesus may be accommodated to the doctrines of religion, and much spiritual instruction may be derived from them. But these three, the cure of diseases, the casting out devils, and the raising the dead, are applied by himself in the manner which I have stated. They are not only a confirmation of his divine mission, by being a display of the same kind of power wliich appears in creation and providence, but, from their nature, they are a proof of the charac- teristical doctrines of the Gospel ; and we are led by considering works so great in themselves, and at the same time so apposite to the purpose for which they were wrought, to transfer to the miracles of Jesus that devout exclamation which an enlarged view of the creation dictated to the Psalmist ; " How manifold are thy works, 0 Lord ; in wisdom hast thou made them all."* I have thus stated the force of that argument which arises fromthe miracles of Jesus, as they are recorded in the New Testament. They who beheld them said, " When Messias cometh, will he do more miracles than those which this man doth ? This is the prophet."t They spoke what they felt, and the deductions of the most enlighten- ed reason upon this subject accord with the feelings of every unbiass- ed spectator. But we are not the spectators of the miracles of Jesus ; the report only has reached our ears ; and some further principles are necessary in our situation to enable us to apply the argument from miracles in support of the truth of Christianity. Section II. It appeared more consistent with the sin)plicity of nature and the character of man, that one or more persons should be ordained the instruments of conveying an extraordinary revelation to the rest of the world, than that it should be imparted to every individual mind. The commission of these messengers of heaven may be attested by changes upon the order of nature, which the Almighty accomplishes through their agency. But the works which they do, are objects of sense only to their contemporaries with whom they converse. Without a perpetual miracle exhibited in their preservation, those facts which are the proof of the divine revelation must be transmitted to succeed- ing ages, by oral or written tradition, and, like all other facts in the history of former times, they must constitute part of that information which is received upon the credit of testimony. Accordingly we say, that Jesus Christ, for a few years, did signs and wonders in the presence of his disciples, and before all the people : the report of them was carried through the world after his departure from it by chosen witnesses, to whom he had imparted the power of working miracles ; and many of the miracles done both by him and his apostles are now written in'authentic genuine records which have reached our days, that we also may believe that he is the Son of God, Supposing then we admit, that the eye-witnesses of the miracles of Jesus reasoned justly when they considered them as proofs of a divine commission ; still it remains to be inquired, whether the evidence which has trans- • Psalm civ. 24. f John vii. 31—40. OP CHRISTIANITY. 35 mitted these miracles to us, is sufficient to warrant us in drawing the same inference which we should have drawn if we ourselves had seen them. There are three questions which require to be discussed upon this subject. Whether miracles are capable of proof? Whether the testi- mony borne to the miracles of Jesus was creditable at the time it was given? And whether the distance at which we live from that time destroys, or in any material degree impairs its original credibility ? 1. It was said by one of tiie subtlest reasoners of modern times, that a miracle is incapable of being proved by testimony. His argu- ment was this : " Our belief of any fact attested by eye-witnesses rests upon our experience of the usual conformity of facts to the reports of witnesses. But a firm and unalterable experience hath established the laws of nature. When, therefore, witnesses attest any fact which is a violation of the laws of nature, here is a contest of two opposite experiences. The proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can be imagined ; and if so, it cannot be surmounted by a proof from testimony, because testimony rests upon experience." Mr. Hume boasted of this reasoning as unanswerable, and he holds it forth in his Essay on Miracles as an everlasting check to superstition. The prin- ciples upon which the reasoning proceeds have been closely sifted and their fallacy completely exposed, in Campbell's Dissertation on Miracles; one of the best polemical treatises that ever was written. Mr. Hume meets here with an antagonist who is not inferior to him- self in ncuteness, and who, supported by the goodness of his cause, lins gained a triumphant victory. I consider this dissertation as a standard book for sludents of divinity. You will find in it accurate reasoning, and much information upon tlie whole subjfct of miracles, and, in particular, a thorough investigation of the question which I have now stated. It is not true that our belief in testimony rests wholly upon expe- rience ; for, as every man has a principle of veracity which leads him to speak truth, unless his mind be under some particular wrong bias, so we arc led, by the consciousness of this principle, and by the ana- logy which we suppose to exist between om* own mind and the mind of others, to believe that they also speak the truth, until we learn by experience that they mean to deceive us. It is not accurate to state the firm and unalterable experience which is said to establish the laws of nature as somewhat distinct from testimony; for since the observa- tions of any individual are much too limited'to enable him to judge of the uniformity of nature, the word experience, in the sense in Avhich it is used in this proposition, presupposes a faith in testimony, for it comprehends the observations of others communicated to us through that channel. It is not true that a firm and unalterable experience hath established the laws of nature, because the liistories of all coun- tries are filled with accounts of deviations from them. Tliese are objections to the principles of Mr. Hume's Tirgument, which his subtle antagonist brings forward, and presses with much f >rce. But, independently of these inferior points, he has shown that the argument itself is a fallacy; and the sophism lies here. Expe- rience vouches that which is past; but, if the word has any meaning, 36 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE experience does not vouch that which is future. Our judgment of the future is an inference which we draw from the reports of experience concerning the past : the reports may be true, and yet our inference may be false. Thus experience declares that it is not agreeable to the usual course of nature for the dead to rise. Suppose twelve men to declare that the dead do usually arise, there would be proof against proof; a particular testimony set against our own personal observa- tions, and against all the reports and observations of others which we had collected upon that subject. But suppose twelve men to declare that one dead man did arise, here is no opposition between the reports of experience and their testimony; for it does not fall within the pro- vince of experience to declare that it is impossible for the dead to rise, or that the usual course of nature in this matter shall never be depart- ed from. We may hastily draw such inference from the reports of experience. But the inference is our own : we have taken too wide a step in making it ; and it is sophism to say, that because experience vouches the premises, experience vouches also that conclusion which is drawn from them merely by a defect in our mode of reasoning. When witnesses then attest miracles, experience and testimony do not contradict one another. Experience declares that such events do not usually happen: testimony declares that they have happened in that instance. Each makes its own report, and the reports of both may be true. Instances somewhat similar occur in other cases. Un- usual events, extraordinary phenomena in nature, strange revolutions in politics, uncommon efforts of genius or of memory, are all receii^ed upon testimony. Magnetism, electricity, and galvanism are opposite to the properties of matter formerly known. Yet many who never saw these new powers exerted, give credit to the reports of the expe- riments that have been made. Experience indeed begets a presump- tion with regard to the future. We are disposed to believe that the facts which have been uniformly observed will recur in similar cir- cumstances; and we act upon this presumption. But as new situa- tions may occur, in which a ditference of circumstances produces a difference in the event, and as we do not pretend to be acquainted with all the circumstances which discriminate every new case, t'lis presumption is overturned by credible testimony relating facts differ- ent from those which have been observed. Without the presumption suggested by experience, we should live in perpetual amazement; without the credit given to testimony, we should often remain igno- rant, and be exposed to danger. By the one, we accommodate our conduct to the general uniformity of events ; by the other, we are ap- prized of new facts which sometimes arise. The provision made for us by the Author of our nature is in this way complete, and ve are prepared for our whole condition. There does not appear, then, to be any foundation for saying that a miracle is, from its nature, incapable of being proved by testimony. As nothing can hinder the Author of nature from changing the order of nature whensoever he sees meet, and as one v My important pur- pose in his government is most effectually promoted by employing, at particular seasons, the ministry of men to change this order, a miracle is aiwavs a possible event, and becomes, in certain circinnstances, not improbable. Like every other possible fact, therefore, it may be com- or CHRISTIANITY. 37 municated to such as have not seen it by the testimony of such as have. It is natural indeed, to weigh very scrupulously the testimony of a miracle, because testimony has in this case to encounter that pre- sumption against the fact wiiich is suggested by experience. The person who relates it may, from ignorance, mistake an unusual appli- cation of the laws of nature for a suspension of them ; an exercise of superior slcill and dexterity for a work beyond the power of man ; or he may be disposed to amuse himself, and to promote some private end by our credulity. Accordingly, we do not receive any extraor- dinary fact in common life upon the credit of every man whom we chance to meet. We attend to the character and the manner of the reporter ; we lay together the several parts of his report, and we call in every circumstance which may assist us in judging whether he is speaking the truth. The more extraordinary and important the fact be, there is the more reason for this caution ; and it is especially pro- per, in examining the reports of those facts which deserve the name of miracles, /. e. works contrary to the course of nature, said to be performed by man, as tlie evidences of an extraordinary revelation. 2. We are thus led to the second question which I stated. Whether the testimony borne to the miracles of Jesus was credible? The Apostles were chosen by Jesus to be witnesses to the uttermost parts of the earth of all things which he did, both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, and of his resurrection from the dead. This was the commission which they received from him immediately before his ascension, the character under which they appeared before the Jewish council, and the office which they assume in their writings. It is not my business to spread out the circumstances which render theirs a credible testimony,andgive to each its propercolouring. It is enough for me to mention the sources of argument. In judging of the credibility of this testimony, you are led back to that branch of the internal evidence of Christianity which arises from the character of the Apostles, as it appears in their writings — in their unblemished conduct, and distinguished virtues — in that soundness of understanding, and calmness of temper which are opposite to enthusi- asm,— and in those simple artless manners which are most unlike to imposture. You are further to observe, that their relation of the miracles of Jesus consists of palpable facts, which were the objects of sense. The power by which a man born blind received his sight was invisible ; but that the man was born blind might be learned with certainty from his parents or neighbours : and that, by obeying a simple command of Jesus, he recovered his sight, was manifest to every spectator. The power which raised a dead man was invisible ; but that Jesus and his disciples met a large company carrying forth a young man to his burial — that this young man was known to his friends, and believed by all the company to be truly dead, and that upon Jesus' coming to the bier, and bidding him arise, he sat up and began to speak ; all these are points which it did not require superior learning or sagacity to discern, but concerning which, any person in the exercise of his senses, who was present and who bestowed an ordinary degree of attention, could not be mistaken. The case is the same with the other miracles. We are not required to rest upon the judgment of the Apostles — upon their acquaintance with physical 6 38 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE causes, for the miraculous nature of the woife which Jesus did ; for they gave us simply the facts which they saw, and leave us to make the inference for ourselves. There is no amplification in the manner of recording the miracles, no attempt to excite our wonder, no excla- mation of surprise upon their part ; they relate the most marvellous exertions of their Master's power with the same calmness as ordinary facts ; they sometimes mention the feelings of joy and admiration which were uttered by the other spectators ; they hardly ever express their own. This temperance with which the Apostles speak of all that Jesus did, gives every reader a security in receiving their report, which he would not have felt, had the narration been turgid. Yet he cannot enter- tain any doubt of their being convinced that the works of Jesus were truly miraculous ; for by these works they were attached to a stranger. While they lived in honest obscurity, an extraordinary personage ap- peared in their country, and called upon them to follow him. They left their occupations and their homes, and continued for some years the witnesses of all that he did. They were Jews, and had those feelings which have ever distinguished the sons of Abraham with regard to the national religion. Their education, instead of enlarging their views, had confirmed their prejudices. Yet they were converted : with every thing else, they forsook their religion, and joined a man who was the author of a system which professed to supersede the law of Moses. They received him as the promised Messiah. But, pos- sessed with the fond hopes of the Jewish nation, they believed that he was a temporal prince, come to restore the kingdom to Israel, and to make the Jews masters of the world. They were undeceived. Yet this disappointment did not shake their faith. Although they had followed Jesus in the expectation of being the ministers and favourites of an earthly prince, they were content to remain, during his life, the wandering attendants of a man who had " not where to lay his head;'* and they appeared in public, after his departure from the earth, as his disciples. The body of the Jewish people, attached to the law of Moses, regarded them as traitors to their nation. To the priests and rulers, whose influence depended upon the established faith, they were peculiarly obnoxious. That civil power with which the spirit of the Jewish religion had invested its ministers, was directed against the apostles of Jesus : and without any attempt to disprove the facts which they asserted, every eftbrt was made to silence them by force. They were imprisoned and called before the most august tribunal of the state. There the high priest, armed with all the dignity and authority of his sacred oflice, commanded them not to preach any more in the name of Jesus. Yet these men, educated in servile dread of the higher powers, with the prospect of instant pimishment before their eyes, de- clared that they would obey God rather than man. Their conduct corresponded to this heroic declaration. Although exposed to the fury of the populace and the vengeance of the rulers, they continued in the words of truth and soberness to execute their commission ; and they sealed their testimony with their blood ; martyrs, not to specula- tive opinions in which they might be mistaken, but to facts which they declared they had seen and heard, which they said they were commanded to publish, and which no threatening or punishment could make them either deny or conceal. OF CHRISTIANITY. 39 The history of mankind has not preserved a testimony so complete and satisfying as that which I have now stated. If, in comformity to the exhibitions which the writings of tliese men give of their character, you suppose their testimony to be true, then you can give the most natural account of every part of their conduct, of their conversation, their steadfastness, and their heroism. But if notwitiistanding every appearance of truth you suppose their testimony to be false, inexpli- cable circumstances and glaring absurdities crowd upon you. You must suppose that twelve men of mean birth, of no education, living in that humble station which placed ambitious views out of their reach and far from their thoughts, without any aid from the state, formedthenoblestscheme that ever entered into the mind of man, adopted the most daring means of executing that scheme, and conducted it with such address as to conceal the imposture under the semblance of simplicity and virtue. You must suppose that men guilty of blasphe- my and falsehood united in an attempt the best contrived, and which has in fact proved the most successful, for making the world virtuous ; that they formed this singular enterprise without seeking any advan- tage to themselves, with an avowed contempt of honour and profit, and with the certain expectation of scorn and persecution ; that although conscious of one another's villany, none of them ever thought of providing for his own security by disclosing the fraud ; but that, amidst sufferings the most grievous to flesh and blood, they persevered in their conspiracy to cheat the world into piety, honesty, and bene- volence. They who can swallow such suppositions have no title to object to miracles. They should remember that there is a moral as well as a physical order ; that there are certain general principles by which human actions are regulated, and upon which we are accustomed to proceed in our judgments of the conduct of men; and that it is much more difficult to conceive that, in opposition to those principles which analogy and experience have established, such a testimony as the apostles uttered should be false, than that the laws of nature in some particular instances should have been suspended. Of the suspension of tlie laws of nature we can give a rational account : the purpose for which it is said to have been made renders it not incredible. But the falsehood of testimony in such circumstances would be a phenomenon in the history of the human mind so strange and inexplicable, that we need not be afraid to apply to this case the words of Mr. Hume, although he certainly did not mean them to be so applied : "No testimony is suf- cient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact whicii it endea- vours to establish." The falsehood of the testimony of the apostles would be more miraculous, i. e. it is more improbable than any fact which they attest. 3. But although the testimony of the apostles appears, upon all the principles according to which we judge of such matters, to have been credible at the time Avhen it was given, it remains to be inquired, whether the distance at which we live from that time does, in any material degree, impair to us its original credibility. It is allowed that the testimony of the apostles received the strong- est confirmation from its having been emitted immediately after the 40 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE ascension of Jesus, in the very place where they said he had performed many of his mighty works, under the eye of that government which had persecuted him, and in presence of multitudes to whom they ap- pealed as witnesses of wliat they declared. This must be allowed by all who are qualified to judge of evidence. Now let it be remember- ed that the benefit of this confirmation is not lost to us, because, although their testimony was at first oral, given in their preaching to those whom they converted, it was soon recorded in books Avhich we receive upon satisfying evidence as authentic and genuine. There is therefore no room to allege in disparagement of this testimony, the inaccuracy of verbal reports, or the natural disposition to exaggerate in the repetition of every extraordinary event. We are put in posses- sion of the facts as they were published in the lifetime of the apostles, without the embellishments of succeeding ages ; and every circum- stance which moved those who heard their testimony, is preserved in their books to establish our faith. The early publication of the Gospels and Acts is to us an unques- tionable voucher of the following most important facts, — that the miracles of our Lord and his apostles were not done in a corner before a few selected friends, and by them artfully spread through the world, but were performed openly, in the fields, in the city, in the temple, before enemies who had. every opportunity of examining them, who did not regard them with indifference, who were alarmed with the effect which they produced upon the minds of the people, and were zealous in bringing forward every objection. Had any one of these circumstances been false, the early publication of books asserting them would have overturned the schemiB, Further,there is much particu- larity in the narration of manj^ of the miracles: reference is made to time and place ; many local circumstances are introduced ; persons are marked out, not only by their distress, but by their rank and their names ; the emotions of the spectators, the joy of those who received deliverance, the consultations held by rulers, and the public orders in consequence of certain miracles, all enter into the record of these books. While every intelligent reader discerns in this particular detail the most accurate acquaintance with the prejudices and the manners of the times, and is from thence satisfied that the books are authentic, he must also be satisfied that a detail which, by its particu- larity, called so much attention, and admitted, at the time it was published, of so easy investigation, is itself a voucher of its own truth. Again, the history of the miracles is so closely interwoven with the rest of the narration, that any man who reads it may be satisfied that it could not have been inserted after the books were published. — There are numberless allusions to the miracles even in those passages where none of them are recorded ; the faith of the first disciples is said to have been founded upon them, and the change upon their sentiments is truly inexplicable, unless we suppose the miracles to have been done in their presence. All, therefore, who received the Gospels and the Acts in early times, when they could easily examine the truth of the facts, may be considered as setting their seal to the miracles of Jesus and his apostles ; and the number of the first converts out of Judea and Jerusalem forms, in this way, a cloud of wit- nesses. OF CHRISTIANIxr. 41 That confirmation of the testimony of the apostles, which appears to be inipHed in the faith of all the first Christians, is rendered much more striking, by the pecuhar nature of a large part of the New Testament. I mean the epistles to the difterent churches. Paul, in several of the epistles which he sent by particular messengers to those whose names they bear, and which were authenticated to the whole Christian world by his superscription, mentions the miracles which he had performed, the effect which his miracles had produced, and the extraordinary powers which he had imparted. A large portion of the first Epistle to the Corinthians is occupied with a discourse con- cerning spiritual gifts, in which he speaks of them as conmion in that church, as abused by many who possessed them, and as inferior in excellence to moral virtue. In his first Epistle to the Thessulonians, which is known to have been the earliest of the apostolical writings, Paul says, " Our Gospel came to you not in word only, but in power and in the Holy Ghost; and they, i. e. your own citizens, in their progress through different parts of the world, show of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned from idols to serve the living God."* Here is a letter written not twenty years after the ascension of Jesus, sent, as soon as it was written, to the church of Thessalonica to be read there, and in the neighbouring churches, copied and circulated by those to whom it was addressed, uniformly quoted since that time by the succession of Christian writers, and come down to us with every evidence that can be desired, indeed without any dispute of its being a genuine letter. In this letter the apostle tells the Thessalonians that they had been converted to the Gospel by the miracles of those who preached it, and that the effect which this conversion had produced upon their conduct was talked of every- where. If these facts had not been known to the Thessalonians, the letter would have been instantly rejected, and the character of him who wrote it would have sank into contempt. Its being publicly read, held in veneration, and transmitted by them, is a proof that every thing said in it concerning themselves is true, and therefore it is a proof that those who could not be mistaken, believed in the miracles of the apostles of our Lord. This argument is handled by Butler, and all the ablest defenders of our religion ; and I have been led to state it particularly, because it has always appeared to me an unanswerable argument arising out of the books themselves, a confirmation of the testimony of the apostles that is independent of their personal char- acter, and yet is demonstrative of the estimation in which they were held by their contemporaries, and of the credit which we may safely give to their report. 4. It only remains to be added upon this question, that a testimony thus strongly confirmed is not contradicted by any opposite testimony. The books of the New Testament are fall of concessions made by the adversaries of Christianity; concessions, the force of which must be admitted by all who believe the books to be authentic : and it is very remarkable, that concessions of exactly the same kind with those made by the Jews in our Saviour's days, were made by the zealous and learned adversaries of our faith in the first four centuries. Celsus, • 1 Thess. i. 5, 9. 6* I 42 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE Porphyry, Hierocles, and Julian did not deny the facts ; they only at- tempted to disparage them, or to ascribe them to magic. Julian was emperor of Rome in the fourth century. He had renounced Chris- tianity, and his zeal to revive the ancient heathen vvorship made iiim the bitterest enemy of a system M'hich condemned all the forms of idolatry. Yet this man, with every wish to overturn the estabhsh- ment which Christianity had received from Constantine, does not pre- tend to say in his work against the Christians, that no miracles were performed by Jesus. In one place he says, " Jesus, who rebuked the winds, and walked on the seas, and cast out da3mon?, and as you will have it, made the heavens and the earth." In another place," Jesus has beeu celebrated about three hundred years, having done nothing in his lifetime worthy of remembrance, unless any one thinks it a mighty matter to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany."* The prejudices of the emperor led him to speak slightingly of the miracles ; but the facts are admitted by him. It was reserved for infidels at the distance of seventeen hundred years from the event, to dispute a testimony which had appeared satisfying to those who heard it, and which had not re- ceived any contradiction in the succession of ages. Because they did not believe in magic, and saw the futility of that account of the works of Jesus which the prejudices of the times had drawn from their pre- decessors in infidelity, they have taken a new ground, and they affirm, against the principles of human nature, against the faith of history, and the concessions of the earliest adversaries, that the works never were done. But Christianity has nothing to fear from any change in the mode of attack. Sound philosophy will always furnish weapons sufficient to repel the aggressor ; and the truth will be the more firmly established by every display of the mutability of error. It appears' then, that even that part of the external evidence of Christianity, which from its nature is the most likely to be affected by length of time, is not evanescent ; that various circumstances preserve it from diminution; and that we, in these latter ages, may certainly know the truth of the testimony borne by those who declare in the books of the New Testament that which they saw and heard. Section III. The subject would now be exhausted if the only miracles recorded in history were those to which Jesus and his Apostles made their ap- peal. This singular attestation, given upon so important an occasion, would then appear a decisive mark of the interposition of the Al- mighty; and every person who believes the books of the New Testa- ment to be authentic, might be expected to join in the opinion of Nico- demus, who said to Jesus, " We know that thou art a teacher come from God ; for no man can do these miracles that thou dost, except God be with him."t But the subject is involved in new difficulties, and assumes a much more complicated form, when we recollect that • Lardner's Heath. Test. ch. xlvi. f J°^" "'• ^' OP CHRISTIANITY. 43 accounts of prodigies and miracles abound in all history, that these miracles are generally connected with the religion of the country in which the record of them is preserved, and that, as the religions of different countries are widely different, the miracles of one country appear to contradict the miracles of another. If it be said that all the reports of miracles, excepting those recorded in the scriptures, are false, then it follows that there must be a facility of imposition in this matter against which the human mind has never been proof. If some other reports of miracles, besides those in scripture, are admitted to be true, then it seems to follow, that miracles are not the unequivocal mark of a divine commission. This multitude of reports concerning miracles has afforded m.nch triumph to the adversaries of Christianity, and, in the opinion of JNIr. Hume, the authority of any testimony concerning a religious miracle is so much diminished by the ridiculous stories, and the gross imposi- tions of the same kind in all ages, that men of sense should lay down a general resolution to reject it without any examination. The zeal with which he writes, has led him to recommend a resolution very unbecoming a philosopher. At the same time, it must be allowed that, upon the one hand, the prejudice arising from the multitude of false miracles which have been reported and believed, and, upon the other hand, the suspicion that out of the number preserved in ancient history, some may have been real miracles, furnish a very plausible objection against this branch of the external evidence of Christianity; an objection which every person whose business it is to defend the truth of our religion must be prepared to meet ; and an objection which there is the more reason for studying with care, because the attempts to answer it have not always been conducted with sufficient ability and prudence, and some zealous champions for Christianity have mistaken the ground which ought to be maintained in repelling this attack. The four observations which follow, appear to me to embrace the leading points in this controversy, and when properly extended by reading and reflection, will be found sufficient to remove the objection arising from the multitude of miracles mentioned in history. 1. No religion, except the Jewish and Christian, which, by every person who understands the Gospel, are accounted one religion, — no other religion that we know of, claimed to be received upon the foot- ing of miracles performed by its author. Some of the ancient lawgivers said, that they had private confer- ences with the Deity, in which the system of religious or civil polity, which they established, was communicated to them. But none of them pretended to produce, in the presence of the people, changes upon the order of nature. The Pagan mythology was much more ancient than any record of miracles in profane history. Many of the achievements of the gods run back into those periods of which there is no history that is not accounted fabulous ; — some are known to the learned to be an allegorical method of conveying moral or physical truth ; and others are merely the colouring which fable and poetry gave to the transactions of a remote antiquity handed down by oral tradition. The miracles recorded in the times of authentic history co- incided with a superstition already established, the influence of which 44 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE prepared the minds of men for receiving them. They were performed by priests, or men of rank, to whom the people were accustomed to look up with reverence ; generally in temples consecrated by the of- ferings of ages, where it was impious for the eye of the worshippers to pry too closely ; under the protection of civil government ; and in support of a system which antiquity had hallowed, and which the law commanded the citizens to respect. The miracles of the Gospel, on the other hand, were performed by obscure despised men, in the midst of enemies, as the vouchers of a new doctrine which was accounted an insult to the gods, and which did not flatter the passions of men. It is manifest that the cases are widely dilferent ; and before proceeding to any particular examination &f the heathen miracles, you are war- ranted in considering the whole multitude of them as clearly discrimi- nated from the miracles recorded in Scripture, by this circumstance, that they were not wrought for the purpose of procuring credit to a new system of faith. In the seventh century, Mahomet appeared in Arabia, calling himself the chief of the prophets of God, sent to extir- pate idolatry, and to establish a new and perfect religion. He ac- knowledged the divine mission both of Moses and of Jesus. He often mentions the evident miracles which Jesus wrought, and he has pre- served the names of the persons whom our Lord raised from the dead. Those who opposed him demanded a sign of his mission. He gave various reasons for not complying with this demand, and in different places of the Koran appears solicitous to obviate the doubts which his refusal excited. But although his reasons were not satis- fying, and he was harassed with importunity, — although he lived amongst a barbarous unlearned people, and although he possessed a very uncommon share of ability and address, he had the prudence never to make the experiment of working a miracle, and he confesses that God, in his sovereignty, had withheld from him that power. The Church of Rome claims the power which Mahomet did not assume, and the history of that Church is full of wonders said to be performed at the shrines of saints and martyrs, by the divine virtue residing in a relic, or by the power committed to a religious order, to a particular sect, or to the whole Church. But all these are in support of a sys- tem already established, and in conformity to the wishes and expec- tations of the spectators ; and, like the heathen miracles, they extend the prevailing superstition by introducing or confirming doctrines, rites, and practices, exactly similar to those which had been formerly received. It appears, then, from this review, that the history of the world does not present, out of that multitude of miracles which it has record- ed, any that were performed under the disadvantages which attended the Christian, for the purpose of introducing a change upon the religi- ous sentiments of mankind. All the rest were aided by the prevailing opinions ; these alone were opposed by them : all the rest found men ready to believe ; these alone produced a new faith. 2. As the circumstance which I have mentioned forms, upon a ge- neral view of the matter, a clear discrimination of the miracles of the Bible, so, when we enter upon a particular examination, there ap- pears to be the most striking difference between them and all other miracles, in the evidence with which they are transmitted. The tes- OF CHRISTIANITY. 45 timony for a miracle requires to be tried with caution, because it con- tradicts the presumption suggested by experience ; and the more in- stances there are of imposition or mistake in reports of this kind, tliere is the more reason for weighing every report with the most scrupulous exactness. When we proved the testimony borne by the apostles to the miracles of Jesus, we found a multitude of circum- stances which conspire to render it credible. But when we try, by the same standard of sound criticism, the testimony borne either to heathen or to popish miracles, it is found to be very much wanting. Many of the heathen miracles wore prodigies which had no con- nexion with any religious system, or they were phenomena which appeared wonderful to ignorant men, but which a more enlarged ac- quaintance with nature lias enabled us to explain. Others were ex- traordinary works, recorded long after the time when they are said to have been performed, and recorded by historians who, while they adorn their writings with popular stories, are careful to distinguish the narration, which they consider as authentic, from the reports which they retail, because they received tliem. The miracles which Tacitus reports as performed by the Emperor Vespasian, the feats of Alexander of Pontus, which we learn from Lucian, who represents him as an impostor, and the works ascribed to Apollonius of Tyana, whom some of the later Platonists are said to have raised up as a rival to our Lord, — all these have been examined by men of learning and judgment ; and the most zealous friend of Christianity could not wish for a more favourable display of the unexceptionable testimony upon which its miracles are received, than is obtained by contrasting it with the air of falsehood which runs through all these accounts. Mr. Hume has been solicitous to place the evidence of some popish miracles in the most advantageous light, and he has collected, with an air of triumph, various circumstances which conspired to attest the miracles said to be performed about the beginning of the last century, iu the church-yard of St. Medard, at the tomb of Abbe Paris. But although a particular purpose induced him to assume the appearance of an advocate for these miracles, yet the imposture was manifest at tiie time to many who lived upon the spot, and it has since that time been completely exposed in several treatises. In Campbell's Disser- tation, in the Criterion by Dr. Douglas, late bishop of Salisbury, in Macknight's Truth of the Gospel History, and in other books, there is an investigation of many pretended miracles ; and I believe it will be acknowledged, without hesitation, that Dr. Campbell and Dr. Douglas have clearly shown, with regard to all the miracles to which their investigation extends, cither that the accounts of them, from the cir- cumstances, appear to be false, or that the facts, from their nature, are not miraculous. I am inclined to think thnt, as far as this investiga- tion can be carried, it will be found uniformly to apply to the miracles recorded in heathen story, or in popish legends ; and that, as a person who had been accustomed to read much history and much fable, is at no loss to distinguish the one from the other when they are presented to him, so any one who duly considers the circumstances of the case, will most readily discriminate the precise assured testimony of miracles wrought by Jesus as a divine teaclier, which eye-witnesses submitted at the very time and place to the examination of their enemies, from i 46 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE the hesitating suspicious record of wonders said to be performed for some insignificant purpose, which the historians did not see, or which the rank and characters of the person to whom they are ascribed, pre- served from the scrutiny even of those who saw them. The evidence of the miracles of the Gospel, far from being diminished by the number of impostures, is very much illustrated by this contrast. Men indeed cannot perceive the difference with an exercise of understanding. — They are required here, as upon every other subject, to separate truth from falsehood, to " prove all things, and to hold fast that which is good."* Extensive information and enlightened criticism are called in to be the handmaids of religion ; and the continued increase of human knowledge, instead of giving Christians any reasonable ground of apprehending danger, enables them to defend the principles which they have embraced, dissipates objections which might occur to the ignorant, and establishes the faith of those who inquire. I said, I am inclined to think, that if the investigation of which Dr. Douglas and Dr. Campbell have given a specimen, were extended farther, it would be found to apply uniformly to the miracles recorded in heathen story or in popish legends. I used this guarded expres- sion, because I do not consider any man as warranted to say, before he has examined them, that all apparent miracles, excepting those recorded in the Bible, may be accounted for by the dexterity of an impostor, or by the carelessness or ignorance of the spectators. 3. And, therefore, my third observation is, that although we should ascribe some of the extraordinary works recorded in history to the agency of evil spirits, the argument from miracles, for the truth of Christianity, is not impaired. They who can satisfy their minds that such works are not miracu- lous, or that the accounts of them are false, leave the argument from miracles entire to Judaism and Christianity. They who cannot satisfy their minds in this manner, and who judge from the nature of the works, or the purpose which they promote, that they did not proceed from God, are led by their principles to ascribe them to some inter- mediate beings between God and man. But this system, as we have been taught by our Lord to reason,! does not affect the argument from miracles. For thus stands the case : The orders of intermediate beings are wholly unknown to human reason. There may be good, and there may be bad spirits, and their measure of power may be more, or it may be less. But as we infer from all the appearances of nature, and especially from the constitution of our own minds, that this world is not the work of an evil being, so having found that the nature of the revelation contained in the New Testament aflbrds a very strong presumption of its coming from God, we cannot suppose that the miracles, which are the direct proof of this presumption, and which actually were the means of establishing the Gospel, came from an evil being. The conduct of the adversary of mankind was indeed very opposite to the cunning which is ascribed to him, if he gave his sanction to the man who was manifested to destroy the works of the devil, and employed his power to undermine his own kingdom, and put an end to his own malicious joy. As far, then, as the argument ♦ 1 Thess. V. 21. f Matt. chap. xii. OF CHRISTIANITY. 47 from miracles for the truth of Christianity is concerned, the power of evil spirits is merely a speculative point, upon which, as upon many other speculative points concerning which our information is imper- fect, ditierent opinions may be held without any injury to the truth. Whatever system we adopt with regard to the power of Satan, how- soever evil spirits may be supposed to have acted at otlier times, we are as certain as the nature of the thing can make us, that their power was not exerted in the establishment of our faith, and we rest in the miracles of Jesus as wrought by the finger of God. But, although speculations concermiig the power of evil spirits are in no degree necessary to a rational belief of Christianity, yet they will naturally fall in your way, when you are investigating the argu- ment from miracles, and you ought not to be strangers to the grounds upon which the different opinions rest. It has been said, that God alone can work miracles, because the sovereign of the universe never will permit any evil spirit to encroach so far upon the prerogative of his majesty, as to produce any work contrary to the order of nature. This opinion seems to present the most honourable view of the Almighty ; it professes to afford security against many delusions, which, according to other systems, are practicable ; it leaves the argu- ment from miracles clear and unembarrassed, and it has been support- ed by much ingenious reasoning. But it appears to me presumptu- ous, because it assumes more, and pronounces with a more decisive tone concerning the conduct of the divine government, than is com- petent to our ignorance. It contradicts the obvious interpretation of several passages of scripture, and the attempts to give those passages a meaning not inronsistent with it, have tortured scripture in a manner which is not justifiable. It has been said, on the other hand, that evil spirits have been accustomed, in all ages, to exercise their power in astonishing, deludhig, and misleading the minds of men ; that all false religions have been supported by their influence, and that they are continually busied in corrupting true religion. Even the able and profound Cud worth represents it as unquestionable, that ApoUonius of Tyana was made choice of by the policy, and assisted by the powers of the kingdom of darkness, for the doing some things extraor- dinary, in order to derogate from the miracles of our Saviour, and enable Paganism to bear up against the attacks of Christianity. Wiien the matter is thus stated, a most uncomfortable view of the moral state of the universe is presented to us; a view which, without some qualification, approaches very near to the Manicha3an sys- tem, by subjecting the feeble race of man, in their most important concerns, alternately to the dominion of opposite powers. The safe opinion upon this subject appears to me to lie in the middle between these two. We cannot pretend to say that an intermediate being never is allowed to suspend the laws of nature. But we are certain, that all power is dependant upon the Lord of nature. We should be careful not to bewilder ourselves, by carrying the ideas sug- gested by the weakness of human government into our speculations concerning the ways of God ; and we should always remember, that, in the administration of Him, whose eyes are in every place, there can be no delay or opposition to his purpose from the multitude of his mniisters. " He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven." 48 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE l\ God is all in all. The power of working miracles may descend from the Almigiity through a gradation of good spirits ; and he may com- mission evil spirits, by exercising the power given to them, to prove 'his people, or to execute a judicial sentence upon those who receive not the love of the truth. But both good and evil spirits are abso- lutely under his control ; they fulfil his pleasure, and he works by them. / This is the system which appears to be intimated in Scripture, as far as the Spirit of God hath seen meet to reveal a speculative point which is not essential to our improvement or comfort. It is indeed very remarkable, that at the introduction of both the Jewish and the Christian dispensations, there seems, according to the most natural interpretation of Scripture, to have been a certain display of the power of evil spirits — I mean in the works of the Egyptian magicians, and in the demoniacs of the New Testament. But in both cases the display appears to have been permitted by God, that it might be made manifest there was in nature a superior power. The magicians, after they had imitated some of the works of Moses, could go no farther, but said," This is the finger of God ;" and therefore God says to Pharaoh, " For this cause have I raised thee up for to show in thee my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth."* The evil spirits which had afllicted the bodies of men, owned, in like manner, the power of Jesus, and retired at his com- mand. Therefore, he says, " I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven;" andagain," If I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come to you."t Both dispensations give warning of false prophets who should show signs. Moses saj's, " If there arise among you a prophet and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, saying, let us go after other gods, thou shalt not hcark; n unto the words of that prophet, for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether you love him with all your soul. "J Our Lord says, " There shall arise false christs, and shall show great signs and wonders ;"§. and, it is part of the description which his Ajiostle gives of Antichrist, " His coining is after the working of Satan ; with all power, and signs and lying wonders." || Even although you suppose it to be meant by these warnings, that the signs and wonders were to be performed with the assistance of evil spirits, still the miracles upon which the two dispensations are founded, afford a clear demonstration of the supremacy of their Author ; and if evil spirits had permission given them to exercise a certain power at those times, it was only to prepare for the destruction of their power. In the very constitution of the evidence of the two religions, pro^ vision is made for preserving the true disciples from the dread of evil spirits. Whatever opinions may have been entertained concerning their power, they manifestly stand forth in the Bible, confessing their inferiority, and furnishing by this confession, to all whose understand- ings are sound, and whose hearts are upright, a perpetual antidote against the fears of superstition. It appears, then, that the system which ascribes many of the mira- • Exod § Matl. xxiv viii. 19; ix. 24. 16. f Luke X. 18; xi. B 2 Thess. 2, 9. 20. ^ Deut. xiii. 1, 2, 3. OF CHRISTIANITY. 49 cles recorded in history to the agency of evil spirits, does not detract /# from the evidence of Christianity, because our faith rests upon works'' whose distinguishing character, and whose manifest superiority to the power of evil spirits, are calculated to remove every degree of hesita-j] tion in applying the argument which miracles afibrd. One observation more shuts up the subject. 4. The uncertainty witli regard to the duration of miracles in the Christian Church, does not invalidate the argument arising from the miracles of Jesus and his apostles. All Protestants, and many Catholics, believe, that the claim of working miracles which the Church of Rome advances as one mark of her being the true Church, is without foundation ; and no impar- tial discerning person, who reads the history of the wonders which for many centuries have been recorded by that Church, can hesitate a monient in classing them with the tricks of heathen priests. Dr. ]\lid- dleton, in his letter from Rome, has shown that many of the Popish are an imitation of the heathen miracles, and even those who do not admit that they have been borrowed, cannot deny the resemblance. On the other hand, every Christian believes, that real miracles were performed in the days of the Apostles ; and the unanimous tradition of the Christian Church has preserved the memory of many in sncceed- iiig ages. It is natural then to inquire at what period the true mira- cles ceased, and the fictitious commenced. Some mark is called for, to distinguish so important an era, and the imprudence of which some Christian writers have been guilty in their attempts to fix it, has afforded a kind of triumph to those who were willing to expose every weak quarter in the defence of Christianity. Dr. JVliddleton, in his book, entitled — A free Inquiry into the miraculous powers which have been supposed to subsist in the Christian Church, maintained this position, that after the days of the Apostles, the Chtn'ch did not possess any standing power of working miracles. Those who were zealous for the honour of the early fathers, attacked, with much bitter- ness, a position which directly impugned their authority. Some of them very unadvisedly said, that if all the miracles, after the days of the Apostles, which were attested unanimously by the primitive fathers, are no better than enthusiasm and imposture, then we are deprived of our evidence for the truth of the Gospel miracles. Others undertook to defend the reahty of the miracles in die first four centu- ries ; and they weakened their defence by extending their frontier. — The controversy was keenly agitated about the middle of the last century ; and the attention of tlie world was lately drawn to it, by the fascinating language of Mr. Gibbon, who mixing truth and falsehood together, and colouring both with his masterly pencil, has contrived to reflect from the claims of the primitive Church, a degree of susi)icion upon the Gospel miracles. No person who believes the Gospel will think it incredible, that miracles were performed during tlie whole of the first century, because the Apostle Jolin lived about the end of it, and many of those to wliom the Apostles liad conniiunicated spiritual gilts, probably surviv- ed it. All the Christian writers of the second and third centuries affirm, that miraculous gifts did, in certain measure, continue in the Christian Church, and were, at times, exerted in the cure of dis- 50 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE eases, and the expulsion of demons. But those who have exammed their writings with critical accuracy, have shown that there is much looseness and exaggeration in the language which Mr. Gibbon has employed with regard to these gifts. To satisfy you of this, I shall place a passage from that historian, over against passages from Ire- na3us, Origen, and Eusebius, Mr. Gibbon says, the Christian Church, from the times of the Apostles and their first disciples, has claimed an uninterrupted succession of miraculous powers. Amongst these he mentions the power of raising the dead. Iti the days of IrenEeus, he affirms, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the dead was far from being esteemed an uncommon event; the miracle was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplications of the church of the place, and the persons thus restored to their prayers, lived afterwards among them many years.* Now hear Irenaeus himself The true disciples of Jesus, by a power derived from him, confer blessings upon other men, as each has been enabled. Some expel demons so effectually, that they who have been delivered from evil spirits, believe and become members of the church ; others have knowledge of futurity, see visions, and utter prophecies ; others cure diseases by the imposition of hands ; and, as we have said, the dead too have been raised, and remained some years with us.t Observe he changes the tense in the last clause ; it is tiye^eyjnav, rto^f^wftvai'. He docs uot spcak of the power of raising the dead as present, but as having been .exerted in some time past, so tliat the persons who were the objects of it reached to his own days. Mr. Gibbon himself has shown that the Bishop of Antioch did not know, in the second century, that the power of raising the dead existed in the Christian church; and no Christian writer, in the second or third century, mentions this miracle as performed in his time. You may judge from this specimen of the accuracy of Mr. Gibbon. Origen says, in the third century, signs of the Holy Spirit were shov/n where Jesus began to teach, more numerous after his ascension ; and, in succeeding times, less numerous. But even at this day, there are traces of it in a few men who have had their souls cleansed.J Euse- bius, in the beginning of the fourth century, says, Our Lord himself, even at this day, is wont to manifest some small portions of his power in those whom he judges proper for it.§ If you give credit to these respectable testimonies, and they are entitled to respect both from the manner in which they are given, and from the characters of. the authors, you will believe that the profusion of miraculous gifts which was poured forth in the days of the Apostles was gradually withdrawn in succeeding ages, and that the fathers were sensible of this gradual cessation, but boasted that some gifts did continue, and were occasion- ally exerted during the first three centuries. This gradual cessation is agreeable to the analogy of the divine procedure in other matters. It left an occasional support to the faith of Christians, so long as they were exposed to persecution under the heathen emperors ; and it serves to account for what Mr. Gibbon calls the insensibility of the Christians with regard to the cessation of miraculous powers. If * Gibbon's Rom. Hist. ch. 15. f Iren. lib. ii. cap. 33. 4 Orig. contra Cels. lib. vii. p. 337. § Eus. Dem. Ev. lib. iii. p. 109. OF CHRISTIANITY. 51 these powers were withdrawn, one by one, and the display of them became gradually less frequent, the insensibility of Christians with regard to the cessation of miracles is not wonderful ; and the writers whom I have quoted, have spoken of the subject in that manner wliich was most natural. Although it seems probable that miraculous powers did, in certain measure, continue in the Christian church during the first three centuries, yet it cannot be said that the testimony borne to all the miracles of that period, is unsuspicious. There probably was much credulity and inattention in the relaters, and their reports are destitute of many of those circumstances which are found in the testimony of the Apostles. But, it is always to be remembered, that the two are independent of one another. We do not receive the miracles of the Gospel upon the testimony of the fathers ; and, although all the miracles said to be wrought after the days of the Apostles be rejected, the evidence of the works wliich Jesus and his Apostles did, would rest exactly upon that footing on which we placed it. It was to be expected, that miraculous gifts, which had perceptibly decreased till the days of Constantine, would cease entirely when the protection afforded by civil government to the Christians render- ed them lass necessary. Yet we find ecclesiastical history, after Christianity became the religion of the state, abounding with a diver- sity of the greatest miracles. No wise champion of Christianity will attempt to defend the reality of these wonders ; at the same time, the extravagance of the later fictions will not discredit, with any wise inquirer, the miracles of former times. It is obvious to observe, that the Christian world was prepared by having been witnesses of real miracles, for receiving without suspicion such as were fictitious, that the eifect which true miracles had produced, might induce vain or deceitful men to employ tins engine in accomplishing their own purposes, and that after Christianity was the established religion, the use of this engine became as easy to the Christians, as it was to the heathen priests of old. The innumerable forgeries of this sort, says Dr. Middleton, strengthen the credibility of the Jewish and Christian miracles. For how could we account for a practice so universal, of forging miracles for the support of false religions, if on some occasions they had not actually been wrought for the confirmation of a true one ? Or how is it possible that so many spurious copies should pass upon the world, without some genuine original from whence they were drawn, whose known existence and tried success might give an ap- pearance of probability to the counterfeit ? We may add, that if these counterfeits were at any time detected, the strong prejudice which would arise from the detection against that religion, in support of which they were adduced, could be counterbalanced only by the unquc'stionable evidence of the miracles of former times. It appears then, that the duration of miracles in the Christian clnu'ch is a question of curiosity in no degree essential to the evidence of our religion. If no miracles were really performed after the days of the apostles, then every Christian receives all that ever were wronsfht upon unquestionable testimony. If there were some real miracles in aftortimes, they must stand upon their own evidence. We may re- ceive them, or reject them, as they appear to us well or ill vouched; 52 DIRECT OR EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. and we can draw no inference, from the multiplicity of imitations or forgeries, unfavourable to the truth and divinity of the original. Bonnet, in his philosophical and critical inquiries concerning Christianity, has given, besides much other valuable matter, the most satisfying statement that I have met with of the argument from miracles. Bonnet's work was written in French. An extract of the part of it most interesting to a student in divinity, was translated by a clergyman of this church, and published some years ago. Bishop Sherlock, in his first volume of sermons, which is chiefly occupied in stating the superiority of revealed to natural religion, has two discourses, the ninth and tenth, upon miracles considered as the proof of revelation. He treats the subject in his usual lumi- nous manner, and suggests many just and useful views, Newcombe, in his observations on the conduct of our Saviour, has written largely and delightfully of his miracles. Jortin also, in some of his essays or discourses, and in his remarks on ecclesiastical history, has very ably illustrated the fitness with which our Lord's miracles were adapted both to prove the truth of his religion, and to impress upon his followers the characteristical doctrines of the gospel. This view of the subject is also prosecuted by Ogden in his sermons. Campbell's Dissertation on Miracles. Douglas's Criterion. Butler's Analogy. Macknight's Truth of the Gospel History. Paley's Evidences. Fainier on Miracle^. Cudworth, translated by Mosheim. Leland's View of Deistical Writers. Randolph's View of our Lord's Ministry. f Clarke. Bullock. Boyle's Lectures. Middieton. Sir David Dalrymple. ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 53 CHAPTER V. ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. Those lectures upon Scripture are properly called critical, which are intended to elucidate the meaning of a difiicult passage, and to brins out from the words of an author the sense which is not obvious to an ordinary reader. The sources of this elucidation are, such emendations upon the reading or the punctuation as may warrantably be made, an analysis of the particular words, a close attention to the manner of the author, to the scope of his reasoning, and to the circum- stances of those for whom he writes ; and, lastly, a comparison of the passage, which is the subject of the criticism, with other passages, in which the same matters are treated. There is great room for criti- cal lectures of this kind, and my theological course abounds with speci- mens of them. Much has been done in this way since the beginning of the last century, by the application of sound criticism to the Holy Scriptures ; and one great advantage to be derived from an intimate acquaintance with the learned languages, and from the habit of ana- lysing the authors who wrote in them, is, that you are thereby pre- pared for receiving that rational exposition of the word of God, which is the true foundation of theological knowledge. There is another kind of critical lecture, which professes by a gene- ral comprehensive view of a passage of scripture, to illustrate some important points in the evidence or genius of our religion. This kind of lecture is applicable to those passages where there is not any ob- scurity in the expression, any recondite meaning, or any controverted doctrine, but where there is a number of circimistances scattered throughout, the force of which may be missed by a careless or igno- rant reader, but which by being arranged and placed clearly in view, may be made to bear upon one point, so as to bring conviction to the understanding, at the same time that they minister to the improve- ment of the heart. The inimitable manner of Scripture, so natural and artless, yet so pregnant with circumstances the most delicate and the most instructive, affords numberless subjects of this kind of lec- ture ; and I do not know any method so well calculated to give a per- son of taste and sensibility a deep impression of the excellency and the divinity of the Scriptures. One is tempted by the peculiar fitness of the passages which occur to him, to adopt this mode of lecturing occasionally in speaking to an assembly of Christians, although it can- not be denied that the ordinary method of lecturing by suggesting re- marks from particular verses, is more adapted to that measure of understanding, of attention, and of memory, which is found in the generality of hearers. 54 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES But such a mode may here be followed with advantage ; and I am led to give you now a specimen of this criticism upon the sense, rather than upon the words of an evangelist, because the eleventh chapter of John's Gospel may be stated in such a light as to illustrate much of what has been said with regard both to the internal evidence of Christianity, and to that branch of the external evidence which arises from miracles. The eleventh chapter of John is the history of the resurrection of Lazarus, the greatest miracle which Jesus performed. Upon such a general view of the chapter as a critical lecture of this kind is meant to give, we are led to attend to that exhibition of character which the chapter contains — to the nature and circumstances of the miracle — and to the effects which the miracle produced. I. The exhibition of character which this chapter contains is vari- ous, and our attention is directed to several very pleasing objects. It is natural to speak first of the exhibition given of the character of the historian. The other evangelists have not mentioned this mira- cle, perhaps out of delicacy to Lazarus, who was alive when they wrote. They did not choose to expose the friend of their master to the fury of the Jews, by holding him forth in writings that were to go through the world, as a monument of his power. But John, who lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem, probably survived Lazarus; and there was every reason why this evangelist, Avho has preserved other miracles and "discourses which the former historians had omit- ted, should record this event. It is a subject suited to the pen of John : the beloved disciple seems to delight in spreading it out ; for he has coloured his narration with many beautiful circumstances, which unfold the characters of the other persons, and discover his intimate acquaintance with his master's heart. It is a striking instance of that strict propriety which pervades all the books of the New Testament, and which marks them to every discerning eye to be authentic writ- ings, that the tenderest scenes in our Lord's life, those in which the warmth of his private affections is conspicuous, are recorded by this evangelist. From the others we learn his public life, the grace, the condescension, the benevolence which appeared in all his intercourse with those that had access to him. It was reserved to " the disciple whom Jesus loved " to present to succeeding ages this divine person in his family, and amongst his friends. In his Gospel, we see Jesus washing the feet of his disciples at the last supper that he ate with them. It is John, the disciple that leaned on the bosom of Jesus while he sat at meat, who relates the long discourse in which, \ nth the most delicate sensibility for their condition, he soothes the troubled heart of his disciples, spares their feelings, while he tells them the truth, and gives them his parting blessing. It is John, whom Jesus judged worthy of the charge, who records the filial piety with which, in the hour of his agony, he provided for the comfort of his mother; and it is John, whose soul was congenial to that of his Master, ten- der, affectionate, and feeling like his, who dwells upon all the particu- lars of the resurrection of Lazarus, brings forward to our view the sympathy and attention with which Jesus took part in the sorrows of those whom he loved, and making us intimately acquainted with OF CHRISTIANITY. 55 them and with him, presents a picture at once delightful and in- structive. The next ohject in this exhibition of character is the friendship which Jesus entertained for the family of Lazarus. Bethany was a small village upon the mount of Olives, within two miles of Jerusa- lem, in the road from Galilee. Jesus, who resided in Galilee, and went only occasionally to Jerusalem, was accustomed to lodge with Lazarus in his way to the public festivals : and we are led to suppose, from an incidental expression in Luke,* that during the festivals he went out to Bethany in the evening, and returned to Jerusalem in the morning. To this little family he retired from the fatigues of his busy life, from the disputations of the Jewish doctors, and the bitterness of his enemies ; and being, like his brethren, compassed with infirmity, like his brethren also he foimd refreshment to his soul in the inter- course of those whom he loved. " Now Jesus," says John, " loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus." He loved the world ; he loved the chief of sinners. That was a love of pity, the compassion which a superior being feels for the wretched. This was the love of kind- ness, the complacency which kindred spirits take in the society of one another. Of the brother he says to his apostles, with the same cor- diality with which you would speak of one like yourselves, '• Our friend Lazarus." And although we shall find the character of the two sisters widely different, yet he discerned in both a mind worthy of his friendship. It appears strange to me, that any person who ever read this chap- ter can blame the Gospel, as some deistical writers in the last century were accustomed to do, for not recommending private friendship. Can there be a stronger recommendation than this picture of the Au- thor of the Gospel, drawn by the hand of his beloved disciple ? When you follow Jesus to Jerusalem, you may learn from his public life, fortitude, diligence, wisdom. When you retire with him to Bethany, you may learn tenderness, confidence, and fellow feeling, with those whom you choose as your friends. The servants of Jesus may not in every situation find persons so worthy of their friendship as this fa- mily ; and there is neither duty nor satisfaction in making an improper choice. Many circumstances may appoint for individuals days of solitude, and therefore the universal religion of Jesus has wisely re- frained from delivering a precept which it may often be impossible to obey. But they who are able to follow the example of their master, by having a heart formed for friendship, and by meeting with those who are worthy of it, have found the medicine of life. Their happi- ness is independent of noise, and dissipation, and show ; amidst the tumult of tlie world, their spirits enter into rest; and in the quiet, pleasins, rational intercourse of Bethany, they forget the strife of Jerusalem. The next object in this exhibition is the character of the two sis- ters, painted in that most perfect and natural manner, which the Scriptures almost always adopt, by actions, not by words. As soon as Lazarus is sick, the two sisters send a message to Jesus, with entire confidence in his power to heal, and his willingness to come. He is * Luke xxi. 37, 38. 56 ILLUSTRATION OP THE EVIDENCES now beyond Jordan ; the countries of Samaria and Galilee lie between Bethany and his present abode. But the sisters of Lazarus knew too well his aifection for their brother, and his readiness to do good, to think that distance would prevent his coming. They say no more than, " He whom thou lovest is sick," and they leave Jesus to inter- pret their wish. When Jesus arrives at Bethany, after the death of Lazarus, the different characters of the two sisters are supported with the most delicate discrimination, even under that pressure of grief which, in the hand of a coarse painter, would have obliterated every distinguishing feature. Martha, who had been " cumbered with much serving," when she had to entertain our Lord, rises with the same officious zeal from the ground, where she was sitting dishevelled and in sackcloth, amongst the friends who had come to comfort her. She rises the moment she hears by some chance messenger that Jesus is at hand, and runs to meet him. Mary, who had sat at the feet of Jesus, so much engaged with his discourse as not to think of providing for his entertainment, is incapable of so brisk an exertion, or thinks it more respectful to Jesus to wait his coming. This difference in the conduct of the two sisters is in the style of nature, according to which the particular temper, and feelings of particular persons, give a very great variety to the language of passion upon occasions equally inte- resting to all of them. A man may know, he ought to know, every corner in his own heart, how far any part of his conduct proceeds from the defect of good, or the prevalence of wrong principles. But the most intimate acquaintance does not give him access to know all the notions of delicacy and propriety which may restrain, or urge on others at particular seasons, and may give to their conduct, in the eye of careless observers, a very different appearance from that which they would wish ; and it argues both an uncandid spirit, and very little knowledge of the world, to say or to think this man does not feel as he ought, because he does not express his feelings as 1 would express mine. Martha ran and met Jesus : Mary sat still in the house. When Martha comes to Jesus, there is in her first words a mixture of re- proach for his delay, and of confidence in his kindness, " J^ord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died." A gleam of hope, in- deed, shoots athwart the sorrowful mind of Martha at the sight of Jesus. But her wish was so great that she is afraid to mention it. " I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee." She has conceived a hope, in the state of her mind it was a wild hope, that her brother whom she had lost might be in- stantly restored. Jesus composes her spirit, prepares her for this gift, by recalling her thoughts from the general resurrection to himself, and probably gives her some sign or some direction, in consequence of which she goes to the house, and without alarming the Jews who were assembled there, says secretly to her sister, " The Master is come, and calleth for thee." This message instantly rouses Mary. Her spirit, bowed down with grief, revives at his call, and without knowing, probably without conceiving the purpose for which he called her, she arose quickly and went to him. When she arrives, there is more submission in her manner than there had been in that of Mar- tha. The marks are stronger of a depressed and afflicted spirit. She fell down at his feet, weeping. But, as if to remind us that we should OF CHRISTIANITY. 57 look beyond these outward expressions, which, being very much a matter ofconstitution, vary exceedingly in ditierent persons, the evan- gehst puts the same words into the mouth of both, " Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died ;" and whatever interpreta- tion we give to these words when they are spoken by the one sister, we cannot avoid giving them the same when they are spoken by the other. In this exhibition of the manner of the two sisters there is so much of nature, and of nature appearing strongly in minute circum- stances, as to be far superior to that truth of painting which we ad- mire in a fancied p>icture, and to carry with it an internal evidence that John was a witness of what he describes, and that his drawing is part of a scene which, from the powerful, yet ditferent emotions of the two sisters, had made a deep impression upon his feehng breast. Tlie next object which presents itself in this moral exhibition, is the character of the Apostles, The Gospels present us with the most natural picture of the Apostles ; their doubts, their fears, their slow- ness of apprehension and of belief. By circumstances that seem to be incidentally recorded, we see them feeling and acting, not indeed in the manner which would have occurred to a rude, unskilful hand, had he attempted to draw those who were honoured with being the companions of Jesus, but in the manner which any one intimately acquainted with the human heart will perceive to be the most natural for men of their condition and education, and situated as they were. We see them differing from one another in sentiments and conduct, with the same kind of variety which is observable amongst our neighbours and companions, each preserving in every situation his peculiar character, and all at the same time uniting in attachment to their master. Although the companions of Jesus were interested in the fate of his friend Lazarus, yet they did not understand the hints which our Lord gave them. Although sleep is one of tiie most common images of death, they suppose when Jesus says, " Our friend Lazarus sleep- eth," that he was enjoying a refreshing sleep, by which nature was to work his cure ; and not attending to tlie impropriety of Jesus going a long way to awake him out of such a sleep, they say, " Lord, if he sleep he shall do well." When Jesus tells them plainly "Laza- rus is dead," Thomas stands forth, and by one expression pre- sents to us the same character which is more fully unfolded in an- other chapter of this Gospel* All the disciples were filled with sorrow and despair, when they saw their Master condemned, executed, and laid in the tomb. " For as yet," says John, " they knew not the Scripture that he must rise again from the dead." At length, " Jesus came and stood in the midst of them." " Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord." It happened that Thomas was not present. And when " the other disciples had said to him, we have seen the Lord," his answer was, "Except I shall see in his liands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." About eight days after, Jesus condescended to give him this proof. " Reach "hither," said he, "thy finger, and • John XX. 9, 1 9, 20, 24—28. 58 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES behold my hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side, and be not faithless but believing. And Thomas answered and said. My Lord and my God." He had felt doubts, but his heart ap- pears full of aliectiou and reverence. Now, mark here the same Thomas. The disciples were alarmed at the danger of going back to Judea. They had tried to dissuade their Master, but they find him fixed in his purpose. " Lazarus is dead, nevertheless let us go unto him. Then said Thomas unto his fellow disciples, let us also go, that we may die with him." You see here the same warmth of temper, the same firm determined mind which appeared at the other time, but you see also the same defect of faith. Thomas does not think it possible that Jesus could shelter himself from the Jews. He does not see any purpose that could be served by the journey. He tliinks Jesus is going to throw away his life. Yet he resolves himself, and he encourages his fellow disciples not to part with him. Our INIaster makes a sacrifice of his life. We have forsaken all and follow- ed him. Let us follow hinr also in this journey; " let us go that we may die with liim." It is the strong effort of a mind which loved and venerated Jesus, yet distrusted and did not know his divine power : Thomas faithless, yet afiectionate and manly. Such is the mixture of character which we often meet with in common life. They who are most intimately acquainted with the workings of the human heart, and who have observed most accurately the manners of those around them, will best perceive the truth of that picture which the Evangelists have drawn of themselves, and they will be struck with the force of that internal evidence for the Gospel history which arises from this simple natural record. We cannot attend to this picture without recollecting the divine power which, out of these feeble doubting men, raised the most successful instru- ments of spreading the religion of Jesus. There was no want of faith after the day of Pentecost. Thomas was one of that company which was assembled, when they were all filled with the Holy Ghost ; and he who now says, " Let us go and die with Jesus," with power gave witness of tlie resurrection of the Lord.* The principal object in this moral exhibition yet remains. It is Jesus iiimself. The striking feature throughout the whole is tender- ness and love. But we discern also prudence, fortitude, and dignity ; and this chapter may thus serve as a specimen of that most perfect and most diflicult character, which the Apostles were incapable of con- ceiving, and which, had they conceived it, they would have been unable to support in every situation with such exact propriety, if they had not drawn it from the life. After he receives the message from the sisters, he relieves himself from the importunity of his disciples, by an assurance which was sufficient to remove their anxiety, and he lingers for two days in the place where he was. The purpose of his lingering was, that Lazarus might be truly dead, that he might not merely recover a man who was sick, but that he might raise a man who had been in the grave. But this lingering did not proceed from indifference. Mark how beauti- fully the fifth verse is thrown in between the assurance given to the dis- • Acts iv. 31. 33. OF CHRISTIANITY. 59 ciples, and the resolution to delny. He loved the family. He entered into their sorrows. His sympathy for them, indeed, yields to his prose- cution of the great purpose for which he came, yet his love is not the less for delay. How tender and how soothing ! The merciful High Priest, to whom Christians still send their requests, is not forgetful, althougli lie does not instantly grant them. He loves and pities his own. But he does not think their time always the best. His own time for showing favour is set. No intervening circumstance can prevent its coming; and when it arrives, they themselves will acknowledge that it has been well chosen, and all their sorrow will be forgotten and overpaid by the joy which is brought to their souls. One of the finest moral lessons is con- veyed by this delay of Jesus. It is pleasing to act from kindness, com- passion, and love. But the excess of good affections may sometimes mislead us ; and there are considerations of prudence, of fidelity, and justice,which may give to the conduct of the most tender-hearted man an appearance of coldness and severity. The world may judge hastily in such instances. But let every man be satisfied in his own mind, first, that he has good affections ; and next, that the considerations which sometimes restrain the exercise of them, are such that he need not be ashamed of their influence. It is strongly marked in this moral picture, that the delay of Jesus, although dictated by prudence, did not proceed from any consideration of his personal safety. For, when the disciples represented the danger of retiring to Judea, his answer is, " Are there not twelve hours in the day ? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world. But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him." His meaning is explained by other similar expressions. The Jews divided the day both in summer and winter into twelve hours, so that an hour with them marked, not as with us, a certain portion of time, but the twelfth part of a day, longer in summer, and shorter in winter. The time of his life upon earth was the day of Jesus, during which he had to finish the work given him to do. While this day continued, none of his enemies had power to take away his life, and he had nothing to fear in fulfilling the commandment of God. When this day ended, his work ended also ; he fell indeed into the hands of his enemies ; but he was ready to be offered up. And thus in the same picture Jesus is exhibited as gentle, feeling, compassionate to his friends, undaunted in the face of his enemies, assiduous and fearless in working the work of Him that sent him. There shines throughout the whole of this picture a dignity of manner ; no indecent haste ; no distrust of his own power; a delay, which rendered one work more difficult, yet which is not employed in preparing for an uncommon exertion. — " Lazarus is dead, and I am glad for your sakes, that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe." He wishes to give his disciples a more striking manifestation of his divine power ; and the display is made for their sakes, not for his own. With what awful solemnity does lie unfold to Martha his exalted character in these words: "I am the resurrection and the life; he that believcth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believcth in me, shall never die ;" and how suitably to the authority implied in that character does he require from Martha a confession of her faith in him ! 60 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES Yet how easily does he descend from this dignity to mingle his tears with those of his friends. " When he saw Mary weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled :" and as they led him to the sepulchre, " Jesus wept." How amiable a picture of the Saviour of the world ! He found upon earth an hospital full of the sound of lamentation, a dormitory in which some are every day falling asleep, and they who remain are mourn- ing over those who to them are not. He hath brought a cordial to revive our spirits, while we are bearing our portion of this general sorrow, and he hath opened to our view a land of rest. But even while he is executing his gracious purpose, his heart is melted with the sight of that distress which he came to relieve, and although he was able to destroy the king of terrors, he was troubled when he beheld in the company of mourners a monument of his power. We do .not read that Jesus ever shed tears for his own sufferings. When he was going to the cross, he turned round and said, " Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me." But he wept over Jerusalem when he thought of the destruction that was coming upon it :* and here the anguish of his friends draws from him groans and tears. He was soon to remove their anguish. But it was not the less bitter during its continuance ; and it is the present distress of his friends into which his heart enters thus readily. Let the false pride of philosophy place the perfection of the human character in an equality of mind, unmoved by the events that befal ourselves or others. But Christians may learn from the example of him who was made like his brethren, that the variety in the events of life was intended by the author of nature as an exercise of feeling ; that it is no part of our duty to harden our hearts against the impres- sions which they make, and that we need not be ashamed of express- ing what we feel. That God, who chastens his children, loves a heart which is tender before him; and Jesus, who wept himself, commands us to weep with them that weep. The tears shed are both a tribute to the dead, and an amiable display of the heart of the living, and they interest every spectator in the persons from whom they flow. Thus have we seen in this mortal picture of the character of Jesus, tenderness, compassion, prudence, fortitude, dignity, "• Christ, the power of God, and the wisdom of God,"t the strength of an almighty arm displayed by a man like his brethren, " the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. "J The assemblage of qualities is so uncommon, and the harmony with which they are blended so entire, that they convey to every intelligent reader an impression of the divinity of our religion, and we cannot contemplate, this picture without feeling the sentiment which was afterwards ex- pressed by the Centurion who stood over against the cross of Jesus : " Truly this was the Son of God."§ H. Circumstances of the miracle. Mr. Hume and other philosophers, both before and after his time, have denied the conclusiveness of the general argument from miracles, • Luke xxiii. 28; xix. 41. f I Cor. i. 24. ^ John i. 14. § Matt, xxvii, .'j4. OF CHRISTIANITY. Gl or they have endeavoured to destroy that evidence from testimony upon which we give credit to tiie works recorded in the Gospel. But there is a set of minute writers in the deistical controversy, who have adopted a style of philological or verbal objections, which would set aside the truth of the record, not by any general reasoning, but by supposed instances of inaccuracy or impropriety in particular narra- tions. This style of objections enters into ordinary conversation ; it is level to the understanding of many, who are incapable of apprehend- ing a general argument ; and it is the usual refuge of those who have nothing else to oppose to the evidences of the Christian religion. You will find objections of this kind occasionally thrown out in many deistical writers. But they were formed into a sort of system in a treatise published about sixty years ago, by Mr. Woolston, and entitled, " Discourses upon the Miracles of our Saviour," a book now very little known, but which drew great attention at the time, and was overpowered by a variety of able answers. JNIr. Woolston at- tempted to show that the earliest and most respectable writers of the Christian church understood the miracles of our Saviour purely in an allegorical sense, as emblems of the spiritual life ; and that there was good reason for doing so, because the accounts, taken in a literal sense, are absurd and incredible. He has been convicted by those who have answered him, of gross disingenuity in maintaining the first of his positions. It is true that the fathers, even of the first century, were led by their attachment to that philosophy in which they had been educated, to seek for hidden spiritual meanings in the plain historical parts of Scripture. And Origen, in the third century, went so far as to undervalue the literal sense in comparison with the alle- gorical, saying, " the Scriptures are of little use to those who under- stand them as they are written."* He has pursued this manner of interpreting the miracles of our Saviour much farther than became a sound reasoner. But although it appeared to him more sublime and instructive than a simple exposition of the facts recorded, yet it pro- ceeds upon a supposition of the truth of the facts ; and accordingly in his valuable work against Celsus the Jew, where he answers the objections to the truth of Christianity, and states with great force of reason the arguments upon which our faith rests, he appeals repeatedly to the miracles which Jesus did, which he enabled his apostles to do, and some faint traces of which remained in the days of Origen. He says that the miracles of Christ converted nations, and that it would have been absurd in the apostles to have attempted the introduction of anew religion without the help of miracles. Mr. Woolston, there- fore, is left without the support of that authority which he pleads ; for Origen, the most allegorical of the fathers, even where he prefers the allegorical, does not exclude the literal sense ; and his argumentative discourse proceeds upon the acknowledged truth of the facts recorded. The second position does not profess to rest upon the authority of any name, but upon the nature of the narration, which, Mr. Woolston says, is so filled with monstrous incredibilities and absurdities, that the best way in which any person can defend it, is by having recourse to the allegorical sense. But in this way, the argument from miracles • Origen, Stroniata, lib. z. ,8 62 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES is totally lost, because, if we regard them not as facts, but as a method of conveying spiritual instruction, the appeal whicii Jesus continually made to the works that he did, must appear to us chimerical or false. Although, therefore, Mr. Woolston has the effrontery to pretend a zeal for the honour of Jesus, in his attempts to get rid of tlie diflicul- ties arising from the literal sense, that literal sense must be defended by every Christian. It is impossible to lead you through all the objections which have been made by Woolston and other writers. But I shall point out the sources from whence satisfying answers may be drawn, and give some specimens of the application of these sources. The sources of answers are three : An intimate acquaintance with local manners, customs, and prejudices — an analysis of the true mean- ing of the words in the original — and a close attention to the whole contexture of the narration. 1. An intimate acquaintance with local manners, customs, and pre- judices. One of the most satisfying evidences of the authenticity of the books of the New Testament, arises from their reference to the peculiarities of that country in which we say the authors of them lived, a reference so exact, so uniform, and extending to such minute- ness, as to atford conviction to any person who considers it properly, that these are not the production of a later age or another country. — This continual reference, while it is a proof of their authenticity, colours every narration contained in them, with circumstances which appear strange to a reader who is not versant in Jewish antiquities ; and this strangeness furnishes many objections to those who are themselves ignorant, or who wish to impose upon the ignorance of others. But the phantom is dissipated by that local knowledge which may be easily acquired and easily applied. 2. An analysis of the words in tlie original. Particular objections against the miracles of Jesus are multiplied by this circumstance, that we read a narration of them, having a continual reference to ancient manners, not in the language in which it was originally written, but in a translation. For, allowing that translation all the praise that is due to it, and it deserves a great deal, still it must happen that the words in the translation do not always convey precisely the same meaning with those to which they correspond in the original. — Difterent combinations of ideas, and different modes of phraseology diversify those words which answer the most exactly to one another in different languages ; and although translations even under this dis- advantage are sufhcient to give every necessary information to those who are incapable of reading the original, yet we have experience, in reading all ancient authors, that the delicacy of a sentiment and the peculiar manner of an action may be so far lost by the words used in a translation, that there is no way of answering objections ground- ed upon the mode of exhibiting the sentiment or action, but by having recourse to the original. 3. A close attention to the whole contexture of the narration. — Those who are forward to make objections, are not disposed to compare the different parts of the narration, because it is not their business to find an answer. They choose rather to lay hold of par- ticular ^ressions, and to give them the most exceptionable form, by OF CHRISTIANITY. 63 presenting tliem in a detailed view. Tlie beaiitifnl simplicity of Scrij)ture leaves it very much exposed to this land of objections. — Wlien all the circumstances of a story are artfully arranged, so as to have a visible reference to one another, the manifest unfairness of attempting to present a part of the story disjointed from the rest, betrays the design of a person who makes such an attempt. But when the circumstances are spread carelessly through the whole narration, inserted by the historian as they occurred to his observation or his recollection, without his seeming desirous to prepossess the readers with an opinion that the story is true, or aware that any objection could be raised to it in this natural manner, which is the manner of truth and the manner of Scripture, it is easy to raise a variety of plausible objections; and a connected view of the whole is necessary in order to discern the futility of them. From these three sources answers may be drawn to all the objec- tions tiiat have ever been made to the literal sense of the miracles of Jesus. To show their utility, I shall give a specimen of the applica- tion of them to some of the objections which Mr. Woolston has urged against three of the miracles of our Lord ; the cure of the para- lytic in the second chapter of Mark, the turning of water into wine at Cana, in the second chapter of John, and the resurrection of Lazarus in the eleventh chapter. " And again he entered into Capernaum, after some days ; and it was noised that he was in the house. And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there Avas no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door : and he preached the word unto them. And they came unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where lie was : and when they liad broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay."* Mr. Woolston says, in a mode of expression which he uses with- out any scruple, this is the most monstrously absurd, improbable, and incredible of any,according to the letter. If the people thronged so much that those who bore the paralytic could not get to the door, why did not they wait till the crowd was dismissed, rather than heave up the sick man to the top of the house with ropes and ladders, break up tiles, spars, and rafters, and make a hole large enough for the man and his bed to be let through to the injury of the house, and the danger and annoyance of those who were within ? A slight attention to the ordinary style of architecture in Judea, and to the words of the original, removes every appearance of absurdity in the narration. The houses in Judea were seldom more than two stories high, and the roofs were always flat, with a battlement or parapet round the edges, so that there was no danger in walking or pitching a tent, as was often done upon the roof There was a stair within tlie house, which led to a door that lay flat when it was not opened, forming to all appearance a part of the roof, and was secured by a lock or bolt on the inside, to prevent its being readily opened by thieves. By this door the inhabitants of the house could easily get to the roof, and • Mark u. 1—4. 64 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES there was often a fixed stair leading to it from the outside, or where that was wanting, a short ladder was occasionally applied. Suppos- ing then, the house mentioned hy Mark to have been built after this common fashion ; the court before it so full, that it was not possible to get near the door of the house ; the people so throng, and so earnest in listening, that it was vain to think of their giving place to any one ; in this situation, the four persons who carried the palsied man upon a little couch, xy^wibiov, think of going round to another part of the house, at which by a stair or ladder they easily reach the roof. They find the door laying flat, and the word i^'^e.tiavtii implies that some force was necessary to break it open. That force might have disturbed the family had they been quiet. But at present they are too much engaged to attend to it, or their knowledge of the purpose for which the force was used, prevents them from giving any interruption. The door being made to allow persons to come out upon the roof, and the couch being a xxut5toi',* it would not be difficult for four men to let down the couch by the stair on the inside, two of them going before to receive it out of the hands of the others. After the couch is thus brought into the room where Jesus was, in the only method by which access could be found to him, he rewards the faith of the sick man by performing, in presence of his enemies, several of whom appear to have mingled with the multitude, an instantaneous and wonderful cure. The palsy is a disease seldom completely, never suddenly removed. The extreme degree in which it affected this man was known to the four who carried him, to the multitude in the midst of whom he was laid, to all the inhabitants of Capernaum.- Yet by a word from the mouth of Jesus, he is enabled to rise up and carry his couch. Judge from this simple exposition, wh?thcr the narrative of Mark deserves to be called monstrously absurd and incredible. The turning of water into wine is recorded in the second chapter of John. The only objection to this miracle which merits consider- ation, is the offence conceived by Mr. Woolston at the expression which our Lord uses to his mother. And I doubt not that it sounds harsh in the ears of every English reader. " When they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, they have no wine ; Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee ? Mine hour is not yet come." Here an analysis of the words in the original appears to me to aftbrd a satisfying answer to the objection. I need scarcely remark, that ywr] is the word by which women of the highest rank were addressed in ancient times by men of the most polished manners, when they wished to show them every mark of respect. It is used by Jesus, when with filial atToction, in his dying moments, he provides every soothing attention for his mother. The phrase r'l sfioi xm aoc occurs in some place of the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, and also in the New Testament. It is uniformly rendered " What have I to do with thee ?" and seems to mark a check, a slight reprimand, a degree of displeasure. It was not unnatural for our translators to give the Greek phrase the same sense here ; and many commentators under- stand our Lord as checking his mother for directing him in the exer- cise of his divine power. I do not think that such a check would have • Luke V. 19, 24. OF CHRISTIANITY. 65 been inconsistent with that tender concern for his mother which our Lord showed upon the cross. It became him who was endowed with the Spirit without measure, to be led by that Spirit in the discharge of his pubUc otiice, and not to commit himself to the narrow concep- tions of any of the children of men. I do not therefore find fault with those who understand Jesus as saying, the time of attesting my commission by miracles is not come, and I cannot receive directions from you when it should begin. This may be the meaning of the words. But as they will easily bear another translation, perfectly consistent with the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I am inclined to prefer it, " What is that to thee and me ? The want of wine is a matter that concerns the master of the feast. But it need not distress you ; and my friends cannot accuse me of unkindness in withholding an exercise of my power, that may be convenient for them, for I have yet done no miracle, the season of my public manifestation not being come." We know that Jesus did not enter upon his ministry till after John was cast into prison. We find John, in the next chapter, bap- tizing near Salim, and this is called the beginning of miracles. Ac- cording to this translation, every appearance of harshness is avoided, and the whole story hangs perfectly together. You will observe, Mary was so far from being offended at the supposed harshness of the answer, or conceiving it to be a refusal, that she says to the servants, " Whatever he saith unto you, do it :" and our Lord's doing the miracle after this answer, is a beautiful instance of his attention to his mother. Although his friends had no reason to expect an inter- position of his power, because his hour was not come, yet, in com- pliance with her desire, he supplies plentifully what is wanting. To the resurrection of Lazarus, in the eleventh chapter of John, Mr. Woolsfon objects, that the person raised was not a man of emi- nence sufficient to draw attention — that he gives no account of what he saw in the separate state — that it was absurd in Jesus to call with a loud voice to a dead man —that Lazarus having his head bound is suspicious — and that the whole is a romantic story. Now the answer to all this is to be drawn from the contexture of the narrative, in which, beautiful, simple, and tender as it is, tliere are interwoven such circumstances as can leave no doubt upon the mind of any person who admits the authenticity of this book, that the greatest of miracles was here really performed. Instead, therefore, of following the frivolous objections of Mr. Woolston one by one, I shall present you with a connected view of these circumstances, as a specimen of the manner in which the credibility of other miracles may be illus- trated. Jesus lingered in the place where he was, when he received the message from the sisters, till the time when, by the divine knowledge that he possessed, he said to the apostles, "Our friend Lazarus sleepeth." After this, he had a long journey to Bethany ; and it does not appear that he performed it hastily, for he learned, as he approached the village, that Lazarus had lain four days in the grave. He delayed so long, that the divine power, which he was to exert in tfie resurrec- tion of Lazarus, might be magnified in the eyes of the spectators ; and, at the same time, he provided an unquestionable testimony for the truth of the miracle, by arriving before the days of mourning were 8* "M 66 ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES expired. You will be sensible of the effect of this circumstance, if you attend for a moment to the manners of the Jews respecting funerals. One of the greatest calamities in human life, is the death of those persons whose society had been our comfort and joy. It has been the practice of all countries to testify the sense of this calamity by honours paid to the dead, and by expressions of grief on the part of the living. In eastern countries, where all the passions are strong, and agitate the frame more than in our northern climates, these ex- pressions of grief were often exceedingly violent ; and notwithstand- ing some wise prohibitions of the law of Moses, the mourning in the land of Judea was more expressive of anguish than that which we commonly see. The dead body was carried out to burial not long after the death. But the house in which the person had died, the furniture of the house, and all who had been in it at that time, became in the eye of the law unclean for seven daj^s. During that time, the near relations of the deceased remained constantly in the house, unless when they went to the grave or sepulchre to mourn over the dead. They did not perform any of the ordinary business of life ; they were not considered as in a proper condition for attending the service of the temple, and their neighbours and acquaintances, for these seven days, came to condole with them, bringing bread and wine and other victuals, as there was nothing in the house which could lawfully be used. Upon this charitable errand, a number of Jews, inhabitants of Jerusalem, had come out to Bethany, which was with- in two miles of the city, upon the day when Jesus arrived there ; and thus, as we found the sisters brought out to the sepulchre one after an- other, by the most natural display of character, so here, without any appearance of a divine interposition, but merely by their following the dictates of good neighbourhood or of decency, the enemies of Jesus are gathered together to be the witnesses of this work. When the Jews saw Mary rise hastily and go out, after the private message which Martha brought her, knowing that she could not go any where but to the sepulchre, they naturally arose to follow her, that they might restrain the extravagance of her grief, and assist in composing her spirit and bringing her home. They found Jesus in the highway where Martha had first met him, groaning in spirit at the distress of the family, and soothing Mary's complaint by this kindly question, "Where have ^'■e laid him?" a question which showed his readiness to take part in her sorrow by going witli her to the house of the dead. The Jews answered his question, " Lord, come and see ;" and Jesus suffers himself to be led by them, that they might see there was no preparation for the work he was about to perform, when he stepped out of the highway along with them, and allowed them to reach the sepulchre before him. His tears draw the attention of the crowd as he approaches the place ; and the Evangelist has presented to us, in their different remarks, that variety of cliaracter which we discover in every multitude. The candid and feeling admired this testimony of his affection for Lazarus, " Behold how he loved him !" Others, who pretended to more sagacity, argued from the grief of Jesus, that, in the death of Lazarus, he had met with a disappointment which he would have prevented if he could. Jesus, without making any reply to eitlior remark, arrives at tlie grave. Jolm, who wrote his Gospel OF CHRISTIANITY. 67 at a distance from Jerusalem, for the benefit of those who were strangers to Jewish manners, has given a short description of the grave, which we must carry along with us. The Jews, especially persons of distinction, were generally laid, not in such graves as we commonly see, but in caves hewn in the rocks, with which the land of Judea abounded. Sometimes the sepulchre was in part above the ground, having a door, like that in which our Lord lay. Sometimes it was altogether below ground, having an aperture from which a stair led down to the bottom, and this aperture covered with a stone, except when the sepulchre was to be opened. The body, swathed in linen, with the feet and hands tightly bound, and the whole face covered by a napkin, was laid, not in a coffin, but in a niche or cell of the sepulchre. As the Jews, at the command of Jesus, were attempting to take away the stone, Martha seems to stagger in the faith which she had formerly expressed. " Lord, by this time he stink- eth, for he hath been dead four days," •tnae,taioi ya^ ta-n. The word means that he has been four days in some particular condition, with- out expressing what condition is meant. Now, his present condition is, being in the cave. It was mentioned before, that he had been there four days, and therefore our translators should have inserted in italics the word buried, not the word dead. Jesus revives the faith of Martha ; and as soon as the stone is removed, he lifts up his eyes to heaven, and thanks the Father for having heard him. His enemies said, that he did his mighty works by the assistance of the devil. Here, in the act of performing the greatest of them, he prays with perfect assurance of being heard, ascribes the honour to God, and takes to himself the name of the messenger of heaven. Think of the suspense and earnest attention of the multitude, while, after the sepulchre is opened, Jesus is uttering this solemn prayer. How would the suspense be increased, when Jesus, to show the whole multitude that the resurrection of Lazarus was his deed, calls with a loud voice, " Lazarus, come forth !" And what would be their astonishment when they saw this command instantly obeyed ; the man who had lain four days in the sepulchre, sliding his limbs down from the cell, and standing before it upright ! The bandages prevent him from moving forward. But Jesus, by ordering the Jews to loose him, gives them a nearer opportunity of examining this wonderful sight, and of deriving, from the dress of his body, from the state of the grave clothes, from the manner in which the napkin smothered his face, various convincing proofs, that the man whom they now saw and touched alive, had been truly numbered among the dead. The contexture of this narration is such as to efface from our minds every objection against the consistency of it ; and the greatness of the miracle is obvious. We behold in this work the Lord of Life. None can restore a man who had seen corruption, but He who in the be- ginning created him. Jesus gives us here a sample of the general resurrection, and a sensible sign that he is able to deliver from the second death. This is the meaning of that expression, " Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die,"o»' ^»j anoewY; n^ tov aiuju, i. e. shall not die for ever. Natural death is the separation of soul and body ; eternal death is the loss, the degradation, and final wretched- ness of the soul. Both are the wages of sin, and Jesus delivers from 68 ILLUSTRATION 01' THE EVIDENCES the first, which is visible, as a pledge of his being able to deliver, in due time, those who live and believe in him, from the second also. The miracle is in this way stated by himself, both as a confirmation of his mission, and as an illustration of the great doctrine of his reli- gion. Before leaving the circumstances of the miracle I would observe, that however ably such objections as I have mentioned may be answered, there is much caution to be used in stating them to a Chris- tian assembly. It is very improper to communicate to the people all the extravagant frivolous conceits that have been broached by the enemies of Christianity. The objection may remain with them after they have forgotten the answer; and their faith may be shaken by finding that it has received so many attacks. It becomes the ministers of re- ligion indeed, to possess their minds with a profound knowledge of the evidences of Christianity, and of the answers that may be made to objections. But out of this store-house they should bring forth to the people a clear unembarrassed view of every subject upon which they speak, so as to create no doubt or suspicion in those who hear them, but to give their faith that stability which is always connected with distinct apprehension. III. It remains to say a few words upon the effects which this miracle produced. Some of the persons who had come to comfort Mary, wlien they saw " the things which Jesus did, believed on him." ♦ It was the conclusion of right reason, that a man who, in the sight of a multitude, exerted, without preparation, a power to which no human exertion deserves to be compared, was a messenger of heaven. It was the conclusion of an enlightened and unprejudiced Jew, that this extraordinary person, appearing in the land of Judea, was the Messiah, whose coming was to be distinguished by signs and wonders. The chosen people of God, who " waited for the consolation of Israel," found in this miracle the most striking marks of him that should come. The conclusion seems to arise naturally out of the pre- mises. Yet it was not drawn by all. Many believed, " but some went their ways to the Pharisees and told them what things Jesus had done." They knew the enmity v/hich these leading men enter- tained against him. They were afraid of incurring their anger, by appearing to be his disciples ; they hoped to obtain their favour by informing against him; and, sacrificing their conviction to this fear and this hope, they go from the sepulchre of Lazarus, where with astonishment they had seen the power of Jesus, to inflame the minds of his enemies by a recital of the deed. And what do these enemies do? They could not entertain a doubt of the fact. It was told them by witnesses who had no interest in forging or exaggerating miracles ascribed to Jesus. The place was at hand ; inquiry was easy ; and the imposture, had there been any, could not have remained hidden at Jerusalem for a day. The Pharisees, therefore, in their delibera- tions, proceed upon the fact as undeniable. " This man doth many miracles." But, from mistaken views of political expediency, the result of their deliberation is, " They take counsel together to put him to death." There is thus furnished a satisfactory answer to a question that has often been asked, Tf Jesus really dil such miracles, how is it pos- OP CHRISTIANITY. M. sible that any who saw them could remain in unbelief? Many, we are told, did believe ; and here is a view of the motives wliich indisposed others for attending to the evidence which was exhibited to them, and even determined them to reject it. You cannot be surprised at the influence which such motives exerted at that time, because the like influence of similar motives is a matter of daily observation. The evidence upon which we embrace Christianity is not the same which the Jews had ; but it is suflicient. All the parts of it have been fully ilhistrated; every objection has received an apposite answer; the gainsayers have been driven out of every hold which they have tried to occupy ; the wisest and most enlightened men in every age have admitted the evidence, and " set to their seal that God is true." Yet it is rejected by many. Pride, false hopes, or evil passions, detain them in infidelity. They ask for more evidence. They say they suspect collusion, enthusiasm, credulity. But the example of those Jews, who went their ways to the Pharisees, may satisfy you that there is no defect in the evidence, and that there is the most literal truth in our Lord's declaration, " If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." The difl'erent efl'ects which the same religious truths and the same religious advantages produce upon difierent persons, aflford one in- stance of a state of trial. God is now proving the hearts of the chil- dren of men, drawing them to himself by persuasion, by that moral evidence which is enough to satisfy, not to overpovt^-er. Faith in this way becomes a moral virtue. A trial is taken of the goodness and honesty of the heart. " If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of hght ; but if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If, therefore, the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness !" The same seed of the word is scattered by the blessed sower in various soils, and the equality of the soil is left to appear by the produce. Pierce's Commentary. 70 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES CHAPTER VI. EXTERNAL EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY — PROPHECY. Had Jesus appeared only as a messenger of heaven, the points already considered might have finished the defence of Christianity, because we should have been entitled to say that miracles such as those recorded in the Gospel, transmitted upon so unexceptionable a testimony, and wrought in support of a doctrine so worthy of God, are the complete credentials of a divine mission. But the nature of that claim which is made in the Gospel requires a further defence : for it is not barely said that Jesus was a messenger from heaven, but it is said that he was the Messiah of the Jews, " the prophet that should come into the world."* John, his forerunner, marked him out as the Christ.t He himself, in his discourses with the Jews, often referred to their books, which he said wrote of him.J Before his ascension, he expounded to his disciples in all the Scriptures, the things concerning himself § They went forth after his death declaring that they said none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come ;|] and in all their discourses and writings they held forth the Gospel as the end of the law, the fulfilment of the covenant with Abraham, the performance of the mercy promised to the fathers. If the Gospel be a divine revelation, these allegations must be true ; for it is impossible that a messenger from heaven can advance a false claim. Although, therefore, the nature of the doctrine, and the con- firmation which it receives from miracles, might have been sufficient to establish our faith, had no such claim been made ; yet, as Jesus has chosen to call himself the Messiah of the Jews, it is incumbent upon Christians to examine the correspondence between that system contained in the books of the Jews, and that contained in the New Testament; and their faith does not rest upon a solid foundation, unless they can satisfy their minds that the characters of the Jewish Messiah belong to Jesus. It is to be presumed that he had wise rea- sons for taking to himself this name, and that the faith of his disciples will be very much strengthened by tracing the connection between the two dispensations. But the nature and force of the argimient from prophecy will unfold itself in the progress of the investigation ; and it is better to begin with attending to the facts upon which the * John iv. 26; vi. 14. f John i. 29— 31. + John V. 39, 46. § Luke xxiv. 27. 0 Acte xivi, 22, , OF CHRISTIANITY. 71 argument rests, and the steps which lead to the condusion, than to form premature conceptions of the amount of this part of the evidence for Christianity. Section I. In every point of investigation, it is of great importance to ascer- tain precisely the point from which you set out, that there may be no danger of confounding the points that are assumed, with those that are to be proven. There is much reason for making this remark in entering upon the subject which we are now to investigate, because attempts have been made to render it confused and inextricable, by misstating the manner in which the investigation ought to proceed. Mr. Gibbon, speaking of that argument from prophecy, which often occurs in the apologies of the primitive Christians, calls it an argu- ment beneath the notice of philosophers. " It might serve," he says, " to edify a Christian, or to convert a Jew, since both the one and the other acknowledge the authority of the prophets, and both are obliged with devout reverence to search for their sense and accomplishment. But this mode of persuasion loses much of its weight and influence, when it is addressed to those who neither understand nor respect the Mosaic dispensation, or the prophetic spirit."* Mr. Gibbon learned to use this supercilious inaccurate language from Mr. Collins, an author of whom I shall have occasion to speak fully before I finish the discussion of this subject, and who lays it down as the funda- mental position of his book, that Christianity is founded upon Judaism, and from thence infers that the Gentiles ought regularly to be con- verted to Judaism before they can become Christians. The object of the inference is manifest. It is to us, in these later ages, a much shorter process to attain a conviction of the truth of Christianity, than to attain, without the assistance of the Gospel, a conviction of the divine origin of Judaism : and, therefore, if it be necessary that we become converts to Judaism before we become Christians, the evi- dence of our religion is involved in numberless difficulties, and the field of objection is so much extended, that the adversaries of our faith may hope to persuade the generality of mankind that the subject is too intricate for their understanding. The design is manifest ; but nothing can be more loose or fallacious than the statement which is employed to accomplish this design. In order to perceive this you need only attend to the difference between a Jew and a Gentile in the conduct of this investigation. A Jew who respects the Mosaic dispensation and the prophetic spirit, looks for the fulfilment of those prophecies which appear to him to be contained in his sacred books, and when any person declares that these prophecies are fulfilled in him, the Jew is led by that respect to compare the circumstances in the appearance of that person with what he accounts the right interpretation of the prophecies, and to form his judgment whether they be fulfilled. A Gentile, to whom the divinity of the prophecies was formerly un- • Gibbon's Roman History, chap. xv. 72 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES known, but who hears a person declaring that they are fulfilled in him, if he is disposed by other circumstances to pay any respect to what that person says, will be led by that respect to inquire after the books in which these prophecies are said to be contained, will com- pare the appearance of that person with what is written in these books, and will judge from this comparison how far they correspond. Both the Jew and the Gentile may be led by this comparison to a firm conviction that the messenger whose character and history they examine, is the person foretold in the prophecies. Yet the Jew set out with the belief that the prophecies are divine ; the Gentile only attained that belief in the progress of the examination. It is not possible, then, that a previous belief of the divinity of the prophecies is necessary in order to judge of the fulfilment of them ; for two men may form the same judgment in this matter, the one of whom from the beginning had that belief, and the other had it not. The true point from which an investigation of the fulfilment of prophecy must commence, is this, that the books containing what is called the prophecy, existed a considerable time before the events which are said to be the fulfilment of it. I say, a considerable time, because the nearer that the first appearance of these books was to the event, it is the more possible that human sagacity may account for the coincidence, and the remoter the period is, to which their existence can be traced, that account becomes the more improbable. Let us place ourselves, then, in the situation of those Gentiles whom the first preachers of the Gospel addressed ; let us suppose that we know no more about the books of the Jews than they might know, and let us consider how we may satisfy ourselves as to the preliminary point upon which the investigation must proceed. The prophecies to which Jesus and his apostles refer, did not pro- ceed from the hands of obscure individuals, and appear in that sus- picious form which attends every prediction of an unknown date and a hidden origin. They were presented to the world in the public records of a nation ; they are completely incorporated with these re- cords, and they form part of a series of predictions which cannot be disjoined from the constitution and history of the state. This nation^ however singular in its religious principles, and in what appeared to the world to be its political revolutions, was not unknown to its neigh- bours. By its geographical situation, it had a natural connection with the greatest empires of the world. War and commerce occa- sionally brought the flourishing kingdom of Judea into their view ; and although repugnant in manners and in worship, they were wit- nesses of the existence and the peculiarities of this kingdom. The captivity, first of the ten tribes by Salmanazar, afterwards of the two tribes by Nebuchadnezzar, served still more to draw the attention of the world, many centuries before the birth of Christ, to the peculiari- ties of Jewish manners. And there was a circumstance in the return of the two tribes from captivity, which was to those who obseived it in ancient times, and is to us at this day, a singular and unquestion- able voucher of the early existence of their books. Nehemiah was appointed by the king of Persia to superintend the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem. He had received much opposition in tliis work from Sanballat, the governor of Samaria, that district of Palestine OF CHRISTIANITY. 73 which the ten tribes had inhabited, and into which the king of As- syria had, at the time of their captivity, transplanted his own subjects. The work, however, was finished, and Nehemiah proceeded in niaking the regulations which appeared to him necessary for main- taining order, and the observance of the law of Moses amongst the multitude whom he had gathered into Jerusalem. Some of these regulations were not universally agreeable ; and Manasseh, a son of the high priest, who had married a daughter of Sanballat, fled at the head of the malecontent Jews into Samaria. Tiie Law of Moses was not acknowledged in Samaria, for the king of Assyria, after the first captivity, had sent a priest to instruct those whom he planted there, in the worship of the God of the country, and for some time they had offered sacrifices to idols in conjunction with the true God. But Manasseh, emulous of the Jews whom he had left, and consider- ing the honour of a descendant of Aaron as concerned in the purity of worship which he established in his new residence, prevailed upon the inhabitants to put away their idols, built a temple to the God of Israel upon Mount Gerizim, and introduced a copy of the law of Moses, or the Pentateuch. He did not introduce any of the later books of the Old Testament, lest the Samaritans, observing the pecu- liar honours with which God had distinguished Jerusalem, " the place which he had chosen, to put his name there," should entertain less reverence for the temple of Gerizim. And as a farther mark of dis- tinction, Manasseh had the book of the law written for the Samar- itans, not in the Chaldee character, which Ezra had adopted in the copies of the law which he made for the Jews, to whom that language had become familiar during the captivity, but in the old Samaritan character. During the successive fortunes of the Jewish nation, the Samaritans continued to reside in their neighbourhood, worshipping the same God, and using the same law. But between the two na- tions there was that kind of antipathy, which, in religious differences, is often the more bitter, the less essential the disputed points are, and which, in this case, proceeded so far that the Jews and Samaritans not only held no communion in worship, but had " no dealings with one another." Here then are two rival tribes stated in opposition and enmity five hundred years before Christ, yet acknowledging and preserving the same laws, as if appointed by Providence to watch over the corrup- tions which either might be disposed to introduce, and to transmit to the nations of the earth, pure and free from suspicion, those books in whicli Moses wrote of Jesus. The Samaritan Pentateuch is often quoted by the early fathers. After it had been unknown for a thou- sand years, it was found by the industry of some of those critics who lived at the beginning of the seventeenth century, amongst the rem- nant who still worship at Gerizim. Copies of it were brought into Europe, and the learned have now an opportunity of comparing the Samaritan text used by the followers of JNIanasseh, with the Hebrew or Chaldee text used by the Jews. While this ancient schism thus furnished succeeding ages with jealous guardians of the Pentateuch, the existence and integrity of all their Scriptures were vouched by another event in the history of the Jews. 9 N 74 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES Alexander the Great, in the progress of his conquests, either visited the land of Judea, or received intelligence concerning the Jews. His inquisitive mind, which was no stranger to science, and which was not less intent upon great plans of commerce than of conquest, was probably struck with the peculiarities of this ancient people ; and when he founded his city Alexandria, he invited many of the Jews to settle there. The privileges which he and his successors conferred upon them, and the advantages of that situation, multiplied the Jewish inhabitants of Alexandria ; and the constant intercourse of trade oblig- ed them to learn the Greek language, which the conquerors of Asia had introduced through all the extent of the Macedonian empire. — Retaining the religion and manners of Judea, but gradually forgetting the language of that country, they became desirous that their Scrip- tures, the canon of which was by this time complete, should be trans- lated into Greek ; and it was especially proper that there should be a translation of the Pentateuch for the use of the synagogue, where a portion of it was read every Sabbath-day. We have the best reason for saying that the translation of the Old Testament, which, from an account of the manner of its being made, probably in many points fabulous, has received the name of the Septuagint, was begun at Alexandria about two hundred and eighty years before Christ ; and we cannot doubt that the whole of the Pentateuch was translated at once. Learned men have conjectured, indeed, from a difference of style, that the other parts of the Old Testament were translated by other hands. But it is very improbable that a work, so acceptable to the numerous and wealthy body of Jews who resided at Alexandria, would receive any long interruption after it was begun ; and a subse- quent event in the Jewish history appears to fix a time when a trans- lation of the prophets would be demanded. About the middle of the second century before Christ, Antiochus Epiphanes, King of Syria, committed the most outrageous acts of wanton cruelty against the whole nation of the Jews ; and as he contended with the King of Egypt for the conquest of Palestine, we may believe that the Jews of Alexandria shared the fate of their brethren, as far as the power of Anti- ochus could reach them. Amongst other edicts which he issued, he for- -bade any Jews to read the law of Moses in public. As the prohibition did not extend to the prophets, the Jews began at this time to substitute portions of the prophets instead of the law. After the heroical exploit of the Asmonaian family, the Maccabees had delivered their country from the tyraimy of Antiochus, and restored the reading of the law, the prophets continued to be read also ; and we know that before the days of our Saviour, reading both the law and the prophets was a stated part of the synagogue service. In this way the whole of the Septuagint translation came to be used in the churches of the Hellen- istical Jews scattered through the Grecian cities ; and we are told it was used in some of the synagogues of Judea. When Rome, then, entered into an alliance with the princes of the Asmonrean line, who were at tliat time independent sovereigns, and when Judea, experiencing the same fate with the other allies of that ambitious republic, was subdued by Pompey about sixty years before the birth of our Saviour, the books of the Jews were publicly read in a language which was then universal. The diffusion of the OF CHRISTIANITY. 75 Jews tlirough all parts of the Roman empire, and the veneration in which they held their scriptures, conspired to assure the heathen that such books existed, and to spread some general knowledge of their contents : and even could we suppose it possible for a nation so zeal- ous of the law, and so widely scattered as the Jews were, to enter into a concert for altering their scriptures, we must be sensible that insuperable difficulties were thrown in the way of such an attempt, by tiie animosity between the religious sects which at that time flour- ished in Judea. The Sadducees and the Pharisees differed upon essential points respecting the interpretation and extent of the law ; they were rivals for reputation and influence ; there were learned men upon both sides, and both acknowledged the authority of Moses ; and thus, as the Samaritans and the Jews in ancient times were appointed of God to watch over the Pentateuch ; so, in the ages immediately before our Saviour, the Pharisees and the Sadducees were faithful guardians of all the ancient scriptures. Such is the amount of that testimony to the existence of their sacred books, long before the days of our Saviour, with Avhich the Jews, a nation superstitious! y attached to their law, widely spread, and strictly guarded, present them to the world ; and to this testimony there are to be added the many internal marks of authenticity which these books exhibit to a discerning reader, — the agreement of the natural, the civil, and the religious history of the world, with those views which they present — the incidental mention that profane writers have made of Jewish customs and peculiarities, which is always strictly conformable to the contents of these books — the express refer- ence to many of them that occurs in the New Testament, a reference which must have destroyed the credit of the Gospels and Epistles, if the books referred to had not been known to have a previous existence — and, lastly, the evidence of Josephus, the Jewish historian, a man of rank and of science, who may be considered as a contemporary of Jesus, and who has given in his works a catalogue of the Jewish books, not upon his own authority, but upon the authority and ancient conviction of liis nation, a catalogue w^hich agrees both in number and in description with the books of the Old Testament that we now receive. Even Daniel, the only writer of the Old Testament against the authenticity of whose book any special objections have been offer- ed, is styled by Josephus a prophet, and is extolled as the greatest of the prophets ; and his book is said by this respectable Jew to be a part of the canonical scriptures of his nation.* It appears, from laying all these circumstances together, that as our Lord and his apostles had a title to assume in their addresses to the Gentiles, the previous existence of the Jewish scriptures as a fact generally and clearly known, so no doubt can be reasonably entertain- ed of this fact, even in the distant age in which we live, I do not speak of these scriptures as a divine revelation ; I abstract entirely from that sacred authority which the Christian religion communicates to them ; I speak of them merely as an ancient book ; and I say, that while there is no improbability in the most remote date which any part of this book claims, there is real satisfying evidence, to which no * Joseph, lib. x, cap. 11,13. 76 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES degree of scepticism can justify any man for refusing his assent, that all the parts had an existence, and might have been known in the world, some centuries before the Christian era. Having thus satisfied our minds of the previous existence of those scriptures, to which Jesus appeals as containing characters of the Messiah which are fulfilled in him, it is natural, before we examine his appeal, to inquire whether the nation who have transmitted these scriptures, entertained any expectation of such a person. For although it be possible that they might be ignorant of the full meaning of the oracles committed to them, and that a great Prophet might explain to the nations of the earth that true sense which the keepers of these oracles did not understand, yet his appeal would be received with more attention, and even with a prejudice in its favour, if it accorded with the hopes of those who had the best access to know the grounds of it. Now, it is admitted upon all hands, that at the time of our Saviour's birth there was in the land of Judea the most earnest expectation, and the most assured hope, that an extraordinary person- age, to whom the Jews gave the name of Messiah, was to arise. We read in the New Testament, that many looked for redemption in Jerusalem, and waited for the consolation of Israel ; that when John appeared, all men mused in their hearts whether he was the Christ; and the priests and the Levites sent messages to ask him, Art thou that prophet ? that the conclusion which the people drew from some of the first of our Lord's miracles was, " This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world ;" and that the expectation of this person had spread to other countries ; for wise men came from the east to Jerusalem, in search of him who was to be born King of the Jews.* You will not think it unfair reasoning to quote these passages from the New Testament in proof of the expectation of a Messiah ; for it is impossible that the books which refer in such marked terms to a sentiment so universal and strong, could have been received by any inhabitant of Judea, if that sentiment had no existence ; and the inference which we are thus entitled to draw from the authenticity of the books of the New Testament, is confirmed in every way that the nature of the case admits of, by historians who write of these times, by the books of the ancient Jews, and the senti- ments of the inodern. Josephus, Suetonius, and Tacitus, although desirous to flatter the Roman emperor Vespasian, by applying the prophecies to him, yet unite in attesting the expectation which these prophecies had raised. Josephus says, " That which chiefly excited the Jews to war, was an ambiguous prophecy found in the sacred books, that at that time some one within their country should arise, that should obtain the empire of the world. For this they had receiv- ed by tradition, that it was spoken of one of their nation, and many wise men were deceived with the interpretation. But, in truth, Vespasian's empire was- designed in this prophecy, who was created emperor in Judea."t Josephus, although he affects in this pLce, (he speaks otherwise elsewhere,) to condemn that interpretation of the prophecy which led the Jews to expect a Messiah, yet acknowledges that this expectation was general, derived from the prophecies, and * Iiuke ii. and iii; John i. and vi; Matt. ii. f Jos. Hist. vi. 31. OP CHRISTIANITr. 77 entertained by many of the wise. Suetonius says, " Percrebuerat oriente toto vetus et constans opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore JuduB^ profecti rerum potirentur. Id de imperatore Romano, quantum postea eventu patuit, preedictum, .Tudai ad se trahentes, rebeliarunt."* — Tacitus says, " Piuribus persnasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum libris contineri, eo ipso tempore fore, ut valesceret Oriens, profectique Jndsea rerum potirentur. Quae ambages Vespasianum ac Titum prsedixer- ant. Sed vulgus, more humanae cupidinis, sibi tantam fatorum mag- nitudinem interpretati, ne adversis quidem ad vera mutabantur."t Both historians, with that very cupido which they charge upon the Jews, apply the prophecy to a Roman emperor ; an appUcation which, at the time, was most unnatural, and which the event, has clearly shown to be false. But both bear witness to the existence and anti- quity of the prophecy, and to the universality and strength of the expectation grounded upon it. The oldest Rabbinical books extant, are the Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch, and the Targum of Jonathan on the Prophets ; Targums, i. e. interpretations or para- phrases of the books of the Old Testament, composed for the instruction of the people, and used in the synagogues. There are many more modern Targums. But these two, Onkelos and Jonathan, are said by the Jews to have been written before or about the time of our Saviour, and they appear to be collections from more ancient books. They continued always in the hands of the Jews ; they were not known to the Christians till a few cenmries ago, yet they uniform- ly bear testimony to the national expectation of a Messiah, and mark out the prophecies which had produced that expectation. Even the Samaritans, who had only the Pentateuch, entertained the same expectation with the Jews, " I know," said the Samaritan woman, in the Gospel of John, "that Messias cometh. When he is come, he will tell us all things."J And it deserves to be mentioned, that those learned men, who, in the beginning of the 17th century, introduced the Samaritan Pentateuch into Europe, obtained also from the rem- nant which still worships upon Mount Gerizim, a declaration of their faith concerning the Messiah. " You would know," they say, in a letter which is extant, " whether the Messias be come, and whether it be he that is promised in our law as the Shiloh. Know that the Messias is not yet risen. But he shall rise, and his name shall be Hathab." It is well known that the modern Jews still retain hopes that the Messiah will come. They have devised various schemes to account for his delay, and to elude the argument which we draw from the application of the prophecies to Jesus. But even their modern doctors declare, that he who believes the law of Moses should believe the coming of the Messiah ; for the law commands us to believe in the prophets, and the prophets foretell his coming. This much, then, we have gained by attending to the sentiments of the Jews — satisfying evidence that it was not an invention of our Lord and his apostles, to say, that Moses wrote of the Messiah ; that Abraham rejoiced to see his day ; that David, being a prophet.foresaw him in spirit ; and that all the prophets, from Samuel, foretold of his • Suet. Vespas. vi. 8. f Tacit. Hist. lib. v. 9. i John iv. 25. 9* 78 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES days. The Jews said the same thing, and looked for the fulfilment of the promises made to their fathers. How ancient this expectatioa was, we camiot say, because, except the scriptures of the Old Testa- ment, we have no Jewish books of unquestionable authority older than the days of our Saviour. But as it is clear that the expectation was not at that time new, as the first of the Jewish books extant declare, that all the prophets, from Moses to Malachi, prophesied only of the Messiah, and abound with explications of particular predictions, and as the most ancient prayers of the people in their synagogues adopt these explications, speaking of the Messiah under the names and characters ascribed to him in the predictions, it does not seem to admit of a doubt, that the hope of the Messiah was, in all ages among the Jews, the received national interpretation of those predictions in which they gloried. The matter, then, is brought to a short issue. Certain books exist- ed some centuries before the birth of Jesus, which raised in the nation that kept them a general expectation of an extraordinary personage. Jesus appeared in Judea, claiming to be that personage. The people in whose possession the books had always remained, are bound by their national expectations to examine his claim. The curiosity of the other nations to whom this claim is made known, or to whom the person advancing it appears upon other accounts respectable, is excited by the coincidence between the claim, and the expectations of that people upon whose ancient books it is founded : and thus both Jews and Gentiles, without any previous agreement in religious opinions, are called to attend to the same object, and one point is submitted to their examination : Whether the predictions concerning the Jewish Messiah apply to the circumstances in the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth. Section II. The obvious method of proving that Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews, is to compare the predictions in their scriptures with the cir- cumstances of his appearance. It is impossible, in any other way, to attain a conviction of the justness of his claim to that character; and it is clear, that if his claim be well founded, this method will be suf- ficient to ascertain it. This is the method which our Lord prescribed to the Jews. " Search the Scriptures, for these are they which testify of me." It is the method which he employed when.before his ascension, "he expounded to his disciples the things which were written con- cerning him in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms." It is the method by which Philip converted the minister of the Queen of Ethiopia, when he began at the 53d chapter of Isaiah, and preached to him Jesus. And it is the method which is continually recurring in the discourses and writings of the apostles. A person who had no previous information upon the subject, would be obliged, in following this method, to mark, as he read through the Scriptures of the Old Testament, those passages which to him appeared to point to an extraordinary person ; and then he would OF CHRISTIANITr. 7S either fipply every one singly, or all of them collectively to Jesus, in order to judge how far they were fulfilled in him. But we are pro- vided with much assistance in this examination. We are directed, in our search of the Old Testament, by the passages which our Lord and his apostles have quoted, by the knowledge which men versant in Jewish learning have ditiused of the predictions marked in the Jewish Targums, and by the labours of the ancient apologists for Christianity, and of many divines since the Reformation, and more especially since the beginning of the last century, who, with very sound critical talents, and much historical uiformation, have devoted themselves to the elucidation of this subject. There is no reason why we should not ava il ourselves of these helps. They abridge tlie labour of investigation; but they do not necessarily bias our judgments. We may examine a prophecy which is pointed out to us, as strictly as if we ourselves had discovered it to be a prophecy. We may even indulge a certain degree of jealousy with regard to all the prophecies which are suggested by the friends of Christianity, and may fortify our minds with the resolution that nothing but the most marked and striking correspondence shall overcome this jealousy. It is right for you to employ every fair precaution against being deceived ; and then take into your hands any of those books which serve as an index to the predictions in the Old Testament respecting the Messiah. You have an excellent index in Clarke's Evidences of Natural and Re- vealed Religion, which is, upon the whole, one of the best elementary books for a student in divinity, and which is rendered peculiarly, use- ful with regard to the prophecies, by a part of Dr. Clarke's character that appears in all his theological writings — an intimate profound knowledge of Scripture, and a faculty of bringing together, and arranging in the most lucid order all the texts which relate to a sub- ject. You have another index in Bishop Chandler's Defence of Chris- tianity. Sherlock, Newton, Jortin, Hurd, Halifax, Bagot, Macknight, and other divines, have both given a full explication of some particu- lar predictions, and directed to the solution of many others. The com- parison of the predictions in the Old Testament respecting the Messiah, with the facts recorded in the New, is one of the most essential parts of the education of a student in divinity. Other Christians may not have leisure for such an employment. But it is expected from your profession, that you know the occasions upon which the predictions were given, and that you are able to defend the received interpreta- tions of them, and to state the order in which they succeeded one another, and the manner in which they were fulfilled. And if you either bring to this inquiry critical sagacity, and historical information of your own, or avail yourselves judiciously of the labours of others, you will attain an enlightened and firm conviction that Jesus is not only a messenger from heaven, but the Messiah of the Jews. It is impossible forme to lead you through all the particulars of this investigation. But I shall mention, in a few words, the result to which men of the soundest judgment have been conducted, and which they have rendered it easy for us to teach ; and then I shall give you a specimen of the exact fulfilment of Jewish prophecy in Jesus. Moses, by whom the most ancient predictions were compiled, lived a thousand years before ]Malachi ; and Malachi lived after the Jews 80 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES had returned from their captivity, above four hundred years before the birth of our Saviour. During the long period that intervened between the earUest and the latest prophets, there are scattered through the books of the Old Testament predictions of a dispensation of Providence, to be executed in a future time by an extraordinary personage. And all these predictions are found to apply to the history of Jesus of Nazareth. AUhough the predictions which point through such a length of time to one dispensation, differ widely from one another hi clearness and imagery, not one of them is inconsistent with the facts recorded in the gospel. By the help of that interpretation which the event gives to the prophecy, we can see an uniformity and continuity in the scheme. The more general expressions of the ancient prophets, and the more minute descriptions of the latter, illus- trate one another. Every prediction appears to stand in its proper place, and every clause assumes importance and significancy. There are two circumstances which every false prophet is careful to avoid, or at least to express in ambiguous terms, but which were precisely marked, and literally accomplished with regard to the Mes- siah. The circumstances are, time and place. It was foretold in a succession of limiting prophecies, that that seed of the woman which was to bruise the head of the serpent, should arise out of the family of Abraham, out of the children of Israel, out of the tribe of Judah, out of the house of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was born. It is said in the book of Chronicles, "Judah pre- vailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler."* And to satisfy us that this prophecy was not exhausted by the rulers that had formerly come of Judah, we read in Micah, who lived in the reign of King Hezekiah, "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me, that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."! Here is the place, an obscure village in Judea, so fixed by prophecy, seven hundred years before the event, that the ancient Jews expected the Messiah was to be born there ; and some of the modern Jews have said that he was born before Bethlehem was desolated, and lies hidden in the ruins. The time is also fixed. Daniel numbered seventy weeks, that is according to the prophetic style, in which a day stands for a year, four hundred and ninety years, as the interval between the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem, and the establishment of the Messiah's kingdom.^ This interpretation of the weeks of Daniel, which learned men have, I think, incontrovertibly established, is confirmed by other predictions still more clear, which declare that the extraordinary personage was to arise out of Judea, while it remained a distinct tribe, possessing some authority, and while its temple stood ; and that he was to arise during the fourth kingdom, after the Romans became masters of the world. The four successive kingdoms are described in the interpre- tation of the vision in the seventh chapter of Daniel, and so described, that any person versant in history cannot mistake the Babylonian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman. The Romans had successively conquered the three other branches of the Macedonian empire. But * Chron. v. 3. f MIrah v. 2. t Daniel ix. 24, 2-5. OF CHRISTIANITY. 81 E2;ypt still existed as an independent kingdom, till the unfortunate Cleopatra ended her days at the battle of Actiuni, thirty years before the birth of our Saviour ; the next year Egypt was made tributary to Rome ; and then, first, says the historian Dion Cassius, did Cassar alone possess all power. The city and temple of Jerusalem were destroyed, and the constitution of the Jewish state annihilated about seventy years after the birth of our Saviour. Thus the establishment of the universal empire of Rome, and the desolation of Jerusalem, are two limits marked by ancient prophecy. Tlie IMessiah was to be born after the first, and before the last. They contain between them a space of about a hundred years, within which space the Messiah was to be born ; but at such a distance from the last of the two limits, as to allow time for his preaching to the Jews, for his being rejected by them, and for their sutfering upon account of that rejection ; all which events were also foretold. Within the space of a hundred years the ditferent divisions of Daniel's seventy weeks had their end ; and within this space Jesus was born. According to every method, then, in which the time of the Messiah's birth can be computed from ancient predictions, it was fulfilled in Jesus ; and this fulfilment of the time brought about, by a wonderful concurrence of circumstances, a fulfilment with regard to the place also of the Messiah's birth. After the Romans, in the progress of their conquests, had subdued Syria, and the other parts of the Macedonian empire adjoining to Judea, that state, standing alone, could not long remain independent. Its form of government was for some time preserved by the indulgence of the Romans. But, about forty years before the birth of our Saviour, an act of the senate set aside the succession of the Asmonean princes, and conferred the crown of Judea upon Herod the Great. Although Herod was king of Judea, he held his kingdom as a prince dependent upon Rome; and, in token of his vassalage, an order was issued by Augustus, before his death, that there should be a general enrolment of the inhabitants of Palestine ; that is, the Roman census, by which the state acquired a knowledge of the numbers, the wealth, and the condition of its subjects, was extended to this appendage of the Roman empire. In conformity to the Jewish method of classing the people by tribes and families, every inhabitant of Palestine- was ordered to have his name enrolled, not in the city where he happened to reside, but in that to which the founder of his house had belonged, and which, in the language of the Jews, was the city of his people. By this order, which was totally independent of the will of Joseph and Mary, and which involved in it a decree of the Roman emperor tlicn for the first time issued concerning Judea, and a resolution of the king of Judea to adopt a particular mode of executing that decree, Joseph and Mary are brought from a distant corner of Palestine to Bathlehem. They are brought at a time when Mary would not have cliosen such a journey ; and Jesus, to their great inconvenience and distress, is born in a stable, and laid in a manger. . It is not easy for any pnrson who attends to these circumstances, to retVain from acknowledging the hand of Providence, coimecting the time and the place of the birth of Jesus, so as that, without the possibility of human preparation, they should together fulfil the words of ancient prophets. 0 82 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES I have selected these two necessary accompaniments of every action, because it was possible, within a short compass, to give you a striking view of the coincidence between the prediction and the event. But the same coincidence extends through a multitude of circum- stances, which in the prophecies appear minute, unrelated, and some- times contradictory, and which cannot be applied to any one person who ever lived upon earth, except to Jesus of Nazareth, in whom they are united with perfect harmony, so that every one has a meaning, and all together form a consistent whole. It would seem, then, that we are fully warranted in saying that the circumstances in the appearance of Jesus correspond to the pre- dictions of the Old Testament respecting the Messiah of the Jews, and that the presumptive and the direct proof of his being a messenger of heaven, are entitled to all the support, which they can derive from the justness of his claim to the character of Messiah. Section III. But the adversaries of Christianity do not allow ns so readily to draw this conclusion : And there are objections to the argument from prophecy, the proper answer to which well deserves your study. These objections were brought forward, and stated with much art and plausibility, in a book entitled. Grounds and Reasons of the Chris- tian Religion, written after the beginning of the last century,by Mr. Col- lins. Bishop Chandler's Defence of Christianity, from the prophecies of the Old Testament, was an answer to this book : and Mr. Collins published a reply, entitled, the Scheme of Literal Prophrcy Con- sidered. Bishop Sherlock in his discourses on Prophecy, Warburton in his Divine Legation of Moses, and many modern divines, have combated with sound learning and argument the positions of Mr. Collins ; so that any student who applies to this important subject, may receive very able assistance in forming his judgment. I shall state to you the objections, with the answers. The position of Mr. Collins' book is this : Christianity is founded on Judaism. Our Lord and his apostles prove Christianity from the Old Testa- ment. If the proofs which they draw from thence are valid, Chris- tianity is true : if they are not valid, Christianity is false. But all the prophecies of the Old Testament are applicable to Christ only in a secondary, typical, allegorical sense. Such a sense, being fanatical and chimerical, cannot be admitted according to the scholastic rules of interpretation. And thus Christianity, deriving no real support from Judaism, upon which it is professedly grounded, must be false. To this artful mis-statement of the subject, we have two answers. The first is, that there are in the Old Testament direct prophecies of the Messiah, which, not in a secondary, but in their primary sense, apply to Jesus of Nazareth. There is in the Pentateuch a promise of a prophet to be raised up from amongst the Jews like unto Moses.* But none in all the succession of Jewish prophets was like him in the * Deut. xviii. 15, 18. OF CHRISTIANITY. 83 free intercourse which he had with the Almighty, the importance of the commission wiiich lie bore, and the signs which he did. And, therefore, that succession not only kept alive the expectation, but was itself a pledge of the great prophet that should come. The writings of the succession of prophets are full of predictions concerning a new dispensation more glorious, more general, more spiritual than the Jewish economy, when " the sons of the stranger should join tliem- selves to the Lord ;" when " his house should be an house of prayer for all people ;" when " the gods of the earth should be famished," no more otferings being presented to them, and " every one from his place," not at Jerusalem, but in his ordinary residence, " should worship Jehovah." " Behold the days come, saith the Lord," by Jeremiah, who lived in the time of the captivity, " that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel ; after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and 1 will forgive their iniquity, and I will remem- ber their sin no more."* It is further to be remarked, that the prophecy of this new spiritual dispensation is connected through- out the Old Testament with the mention of a person by whom the dispensation was to be introduced. If it is called a covenant, we read of the Messenger of the Covenant. If it is called a kingdom, set up by the God of heaven, which should never be destroyed, we read of a chief ruler to come out of Judah, of the Prince of Peace who was to sit on the throne of his father David, to establish it with justice and judgment for ever; of one like the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven, to whom is given an universal and ever- lasting dominion. If the new dispensation is represented as a more perfect mode of instruction, we read of a prophet upon whom should rest the spirit of wisdom and understanding. If it is styled the deliverance of captives, there is also a redeemer ; or victory, there is also a leader; or a sacrifice, there is also an everlasting priest. The intimations of this extraordinary personage, so closely connected with the new dispensation, became more clear and pointed as the time of his coming approached : and there are predictions in Malachi and the later prophets, which in their direct primary sense can belong to no other but the Messiah. " Behold," says God, by Malachi, " I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me ; and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple ; even the messenger of the covenant whom ye delight in." And again, " Be- hold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord."t Even Grotius, whose principle it was, in his exposition of the Old Testament, to seek for the primary sense of the prophecies in the Jewish affairs which were immediately under the eye of the prophet, and to consider their application to Jesus as a secondary sense, and who has often been misled by this principle into very forced interpretations, has not been able to assign any other * Jer. xxxi. 31 — 33. * Malachi iil 1, 4, 5. 84 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES meaning to these prophecies, with which the old Testament concludes, and with a repetition of which Mark begins his Gospel, than that Malachi, with whom tlie prophetical spirit ceased, gave notice that it should be resumed in John the forerunner of the Messiah, who in the spirit and the power of Elias, should prepare the way before the mes- senger of the covenant. The first answer then to Mr, Collins is, that there are in the Old Testament direct prophecies of the dispensation of the Gospel, and of the Messiah. The second answer is, that prophecies applicable to Jesus only in a typical and secondary sense are not fanatical or unscholastic. We are taught by the Apostle Paul to consider all the ceremonies of the law as types of the more perfect and spiritual dispensation of the Gospel. The meats, the drinks, the washings, the institution of the Levitical priesthood, the paschal lamb, and the other sacrifices, were figures for the time then present, shadows of good things to come, a rough draught, as the word type properly imports, of the blessings of that better covenant which the law announced. Many actions and incidents in the lives of eminent persons under the law are held forth as types of the Christ ; and by the application which is made in the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles, of various passages in the Old Testament, we are led to consider many prophecies, which originally had, both in the intention of the speaker and in the sense of the hearers, a reference only to Jewish aifairs, and were then interpreted by that reference, as receiving their full accomplishment in the events of the Gospel. This is M^hat we mean by the double sense of pro- phecy. The seventy-second psalm is an example. It is the paternal blessing given by David in his dying moments to Solomon, when with the complacency of an affectionate father and a good prince, he looks forward to that happiness which his people were to enjoy under the peaceful reign of his son. But while he contemplates this gTcat an.d ])leasing object, he is led by the spirit to look beyond it, to that illustrious descendant whose birth he had been taught to expect, — that branch which in the latter days was to spring out of the root of Jesse. The two objects blend themselves together in his imagina- tion ; at least the words in which he pours forth his conceptions, although suggested by the promise concerning Solomon, are much too exalted when applied to the occurrences even of his distingnislied reign, and were fulfilled only in the nature and the extent of the bles- sings conveyed by the Gospel. Had we no warrant from authority npon other accounts respectable, to bring this secondary sense out of some prophecies ; or had we no prophecies of the Messiah in the Old Testa- ment of another kind, it would be unfair and unscholastical reasoning to infer that Jesus is the Messiah, because some passages may be thus transferred to him. We rest the argument from prophecy upon those predictions which expressly point to the Messiah, and upon that authority which the miracles of Jesus and his apostles gave to them as interpreters of prophecy ; and we say that when their interpreta- tion of those prophecies which were originally applicable to other events, gives to every expression in them a natural and complete sense, and at the same time coincides with tiie spirit of those predic- tions concerning the Gospel which are direct, we have the best reason or CHRISTIANITY. 85 for receiving this further meaning, not to the exclusion of the other, but as the full exposition of the words of the prophet. There is nothing in the nature of prophecy, or tlie general use of language, inconsistent with this account of the nmtter. If you allow that prophecy is a thing possible, you must admit that " it came not by the will of man, but that holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." Prophecy by its nature is distinguished from other kinds of discourse. At other times, men utter sentiments which they feel ; they relate facts which they know ; they reason according to the measure of their faculties. But when they prophesy, that is, when they declare, by the inspiration of God, events wliich are out of the reach of human foresight, they speak not of themselves ; they are but the vehicles for conveying the mind of another Being ; they pronounce the words which he puts into their mouth ; and whether these words be intelligible or not, or what their full meaning may be, depends not upon them, but upon Him from whom the words proceed. It is thus clearly deducible from the nature of prophecy, that there might be in the predictions of the Old Testament, a further meaning than that which was distinctly presented to the minds of those who spake. — And we may conceive, that as the high priest Caiaphas was directed to the Jewish council to employ words which, although in his eyes they contained only a political advice, were really a prophecy of the benefits resulting from the death of Christ,* so the spirit of God miglit introduce into predictions, which to those who uttered them seemed to respect only the present fortune of their country, or the fate of some illustrious personage, expressions, in a certain sense indeed, applicable to them, but pointing to a more important event, and a more glorious personage, in whom it was to appear at a future period that they were literally fulfilled. As there is nothing in the nature of prophecy inconsistent with that account of types and secondary senses which consthutes our second answer to the objection of Mr. Collins, so this account is supported by the general use of language. And any person versant in that use, will not be disposed to call the application of types and secondary pro- phecies unscholastic. The typical nature of the Jewish ritual accords with that most ancient method of conversing by actions, that kind of symbolical language, which is adopted in early times from the scanti- ness of words, which is retained in advanced periods of society, in order to give energy and beauty to speech, which abounds in the writings of the Jewish prophets, and appears to have been in familiar and universal use through all the regions adjoining to Judea. In like manner, prophecies which admit of two senses, one immediate and obvious, the other remote and hidden, are agreeable to that allegory which is only the symbolical language appearing in an extended dis- course. Both sacred and profane poets afibrd beautiful examples of allegory. In the 14th Ode of the first book of Horace, the poet, under a concern for the safety of his friends at sea in a shattered bark, con- trives at the same time to convey his apprehensions concerning the issue of the new civil war. There is a finished allegory, in the SOth Psalm. And Dr. Warburton has pointed out a prophecy in the two • John, xl 49. 10 86 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES first chapters of Joel, where the prophet, he says, in his prediction of an approaching ravage by locusts, foretells likewise, in the same words, a succeeding desolation by the Assyrian army. For, as some of the expressions mark death by insects,and others desolation by war, both senses must be admitted. Allegory abounds in all the moral writ- ings of antiquity, and is employed at some times as an agreeable method of communicating knowledge, and at other times as a cover for that which was too refined for vulgar eyes. There is not any particular reason for saying that it was unworthy of God to accommodate the style of many of his prophecies to tliis universal use of allegory ; because whenever the Almighty condescends to speak to us, whether he uses plain or figurative language, he must speak after the manner of men ; and we are able to assign a most important purpose which was attained by those prophecies of a double sense, the interpretation of which, although very far from deserving the name of unscholastic, may be called allegorical. It pleased God, in the intermediate space between the first predictions of the Messiah and the fulfilment of them, to establish the Jewish economy, an institution singular in its nature, and limited in its extent. This intermediate institution being for many ages a theocracy, there arose a succession of prophets by whom the intercourse between the Almight)'- Sovereign and his people was maintained; and the whole administration of the affairs of the Jews was long conducted by the prophets. It was natural for this succes- sion of prophecy to give some notice of the better covenant which was to be made ; and accordingly, we can trace predictions of the Messiah from the books of Moses, till the cessation of the prophetical spirit in Malachi. The Holy Ghost, by whom the prophet spoke, could have rendered these notices of the spiritual and universal nature of the future dispensation clear and intelligible to every one who heard them. But, in this case, the intermediate preparatory dispensation would have been despised. The Jews comparing their burdensome ritual with the simplicity of Gospel worship, — their imperfect sacri- fices with the etficacy of the great atonement, — their temporal rewards with the crown of glory laid up in heaven, would have thrown off the yoke which they were called to bear ; and those rudiments by which the law was given to train their minds for the perfect instruc- tion of the Gospel, would have been cast away as "beggarly elements." If the law served any purpose, it was necessary that it should be respected and observed so long as it was to subsist ; and therefore it would have been inconsistent with the wisdom of Him from whom it proceeded, that it should impart such a degree of light as might have destroyed itself Enough was to be declared to raise and cherish an expectation of that which was to come, but not enough to disparage the things that then were. This end is most perfectly attained by the types, and the prophecies of a double sense which are contained in the Old Testament. Both were so agreeable to the manners of the times, and both received such a degree of explication from the direct prophecies concerning the Messiah, that there was an unu'ersal apprehension of their further meaning. Yet their immediate impor- tance preserved the respect which was due to the law ; and when, in the end of the age of prophecy, predictions of the Messiah were given by different prophets which could not apply to any other person. OF CHRISTIANITY. 87 — these direct predictions were clothed in a figurative language, all the figures of which were borrowed from the law. The law, in this way, was still magnified ; and as the child is kept under tutors and governors till the time appointed of the father, so says the apostle to the Galatians, the Jews were kept under the law, the guardians of the oracles of God,— the depositaries of the hopes of mankind, until the time came that the faith should be revealed.* When it was revealed, then the allegory received its interpretation ; the significancy of the types, the reddition of the parables, the hidden meaning of the ancient prophecies, and the propriety of the figures in which the latter were clothed, all now stand forth to the admiration and conviction of the Christian world. What was a hyperbole in its application to Jewish afiairs, becomes, says Dr. Warburton, plain speech, or an obvious metaphor, when transferred to the Gospel ; and the Old Testament appears to have been, what St. Austin calls it, a continued prophecy of the New. Section IV. Before I proceed to state the amount of the argument from prophecy, there is one other objection to that argument which requires to be mentioned. The objection arises from a kind of verbal criticism, but does not deserve upon that account to be dismissed as unimportant. It was long ago observed, that many of the passages quoted from the Old Testament in the New, do not exactly agree with the text of our copies of the Old Testament. The apology commonly made for this difference was, that our Lord and his apostles did not quote from the Hebrew, but from the Septuagint translation, which was known and respected in Judea. But, upon accurate investigation, it was found that the quotations do not always correspond with the Septua- gint ; and that there are many which agree neither with the Septua- gint nor with the Hebrew. It was insinuated, therefore, by the adversaries of Christianity, that our Lord and his apostles had not been scrupulous in their method of quoting the Old Testament ; but wishing to ground Christianity upon Judaism, and finding it difficult to lay this foundation with the materials that existed, had accommoda- ted the words of the Old Testament to their argument, and made the prophets say what it was necessary for the conclusiveness of that argument, they should seem to say. It appears at first sight very unlikely that our Lord and his apostles, who began the preaching of the gospel from Judea, would, in the hearing of the Jews, use such liberty with the scriptures which were publicly read in those very synagogues where they were thus misquoted. The detection of the fraud was easy, or rather unavoidable, and must have been ruinous to the cause of Christianity. But however improbable it may seem that our Lord and liis apostles should be guilty of such a fraud, the fact is undeniable, that the quotations in the New Testament do not • GaL iv. 88 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES always agree with the books from which they are taken ; and it re- mains with the friends of Christianity to account for this fact. Many zealous Christians have thought it essential to the honour of that reve- lation granted to the Jews, to maintain the integrity of the original Hebrew text ; and even during the course of the last century, some men versant in Jewish learning argued most strenuously, that the Providence of God employed the vigilance of the Jewish nation, and certain precautions of the Jewish Rabbis to preserve the Hebrew text through all ages, from every degree of adulteration. Were this opinion sound, it does not appear to me that any satisfying account could be given of the ditference between the Old Testament and the New, in those passages where the latter professes to quote the former. But as suspicions had been long entertained that there were variations in the Hebrew text, so the opinion of those who maintain its integrity, was in the last century completely refuted by the labours of Dr. Kenni- cott, who, from a collation of six hundred manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible, has demonstrated that there have been numberless small alter- ations, and some of considerable importance. We found formerly that the various readings of the Greek text of the New Testament arose from the ignorance or carelessness of transcribers, and that their being permitted could easily be reconciled with the wisdom of God, and the divine original of Christianity. We need not be surprised to find the same causes producing similar effects with regard to the Hebrew text. It has been said, that particular circumstances may naturally lead us to look for a greater number of such varieties in the Hebrew text than in the Greek ; and there is much reason to suspect that both the Hebrew text and the Septuagint translation were wilfully corrupted by the Jews after the days of our Saviour, in order to elude the argument which the Christians deduced from the clear application of Jewish prophecies to him. We know that, in the second century, another Greek translation of the Old Testament, by Aquila, more inaccurate, and designedly throwing a veil over many prophecies of the Messiah, was substituted by the Jews in place of the Septuagint. Taking then the learned men who have devoted themselves to this study as our guides, and resting in the conclusions which they have established by a laborious induction of particulars, we say, that the copies both of the Hebrew text and of the Septuagint, which were in use in the days of our Saviour, were more correct than those which Ave now have ; that by the help of many manuscripts, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which was much less corrupted than the books of Moses in Hebrew, the true reading of the Hebrew has been dis- covered in many places where it had been vitiated ; and that the honour of our Lord and his apostles has been fully vindicated ; for it appears that they quoted from the Septuagint when the sense of the author was there clearly expressed ; that, at other times, they trans- lated the original for themselves, or used some translation more perfect than the Septuagint, and that there are many places in which their quotations, although different from the Hebrew that is now read, agree exactly with the Hebrew text, as by sound criticism it may be restored. Such is the important service which sound criticism has rendered to religion. The unbeliever triumphed for a season in an objection OF CHRISTIANITY. 89 Avhich was plausible, because the answer to it was misapprehended or unknown. But the progress of investigation has unfolded the truth, and has placed, in the most conspicuous light, the fidelity and accuracy of the quotations made by those who grounded Christianity upon Judaism. Section V. Having thus cleared the way, by settling every preliminary point, and removing the objections which appear to me the strongest, I come to state concisely the argument from prophecy, or the nature of that support which the truth of Christianity derives from the coincidence between the appearance of Jesus, and the predictions of the Old Tes- tament. In stating this argument, we allow that there are passages quoted by our Lord and his apostles from the Old Testament, in which there is merely an accommodation of words that had been spoken in one sense, to another sense, in which they are equally true. When it is said, in the second chapter of Matthew, "Joseph took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt, and was there until the death of Herod : that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, out of Egypt have I called my Son," nothing more is meant by the expression, " that it might be fulfilled," and the idiom of ancient languages does not require any thing more to be understood, than that the words which in Hosea are applied to Israel, whom God calls his Son, received another meaning when he who is truly the Son of God, was brought out of the same place from which Israel came. We allow that it does not follow, from the possibility of this accommodation, that Hosea meant to foretell the future transference of his words, any more than that he who first enunciated a proverbial say- ing, foresaw all the particular occasions upon which it might be fitly applied. We admit, further, that the secondary sense of those prophe- cies in which we say the Messiah was included, and the typical nature of those ceremonies or actions which prefigured him, are not always obvious upon the consideration of particular prophecies or types. Nay, we admit that there is a degree of obscurity or doubt with regard to some of those prophecies in which the Messiah is directly foretold ; and, therefore, the argument does not depend upon the clearness of any single prophecy, or upon the interpretation which may be given to this or that passage, but it arises from a comiected view of the direct predictions, the secondary prophecies, and the types, as supporting and illustrating one another. Allow as much as any rational inquirer can allow to the shrewdness of conjecture, to acci- dental coincidence, and to human preparation, still the induction of particulars that cannot be accounted for by any of tliose means, is so complete and so striking, as to constitute a plain incontrovertible argu- ment. From the exact fulfilment of predictions extending through many centuries, uttered by different prophets, with different imagery, yet pohiting to one train of events, and marking a variety of circumstances, 10* P 90 - EXTERNAL EVIDENCES in their nature the most contingent; from the aptness of all the parts of the intermediate dispensation to shadow forth the blessings and the character of that ultimate dispensation which it announced, and from the sublime literal exposition which the events of the ultimate dispensa- tion give to all those prophecies under the preparatory dispensation, which are expressed in language too exalted for the objects to which they were then applied ; — from these things laid together, there arises, to any person who considers them with due care, the most satisfying conviction that the whole scheme of Christianity was foreseen and fore- told under the Old Testament. If you admit this position, there are two consequences which you will admit as flowing from it. The first is, that the prophets under the Old Testament were divinely inspired. The very means, by which you attain a conviction that they prophe- sied of the gospel, render it manifest that the things foretold were beyond the reach of human sagacity ; and there is thus presented to us, in the fulfilment of their predictions, an evidence of the truth of the Mosaic dispensation as clear as that arising from the miracles per- formed by Moses before the children of Israel. The second conse- quence, and that which we are more immediately concerned in draw- ing, is this, that the scheme in which the predictions of those prophets were fulfilled is a divine revelation. In order to perceive how this consequence flows from the position which we have been establishing, you will attend to the two uses of prophecy, its immediate use in the ages in which it was given, and that further use which extends to the latest ages of the world. It is certain that prophecy ministered to the comfort, the instruction, and the hope of those who lived in the days of the prophets ; and we know, that the predictions respecting the Messiah were so far understood, as to excite in the whole nation of the Jews an expectation of the Messiah, and to cherish in just and devout men that state of mind, which is beautifully styled by Luke in the second chapter of his gospel, " waiting for the consolation of Israel," and "looking for redemption in Jerusalem." But that this was not the whole intention of the prophecies concerning the Messiah, appears indisputably from hence, that, according to the account which has been given of these prophecies, they contain a further provision than was necessary for that end. There were many parts of them which were not understood at that time, but were left to be unfolded to the age which was to behold their fulfilment. As such parts were useless to the age which received the prophecy, we must believe that, if they had any use, they were designed for that future age, and that the prophets, as the apostle Peter speaks, " ministered not unto them- selves, but unto us, the tilings which are now reported by them that have preached the gospel."* Bisliop Sherlock wrote his admirable discourses on the use and intent of prophecy in the several ages of the world, to show that pro- phecy was intended chiefly for the support of faith and religion in the old world, as faith and religion could not have existed in any age after the fall without this extraordinary support ; and he has been led, by an attachment to his own system, to express himself in some places of his book to the disparagement of the further use of prophecy. * 1 Peter i. 13. OP CHRISTIANIXr. 91 Yet even Bishop Sherlock admits, that prophecy may be of great advantage to future ages, and says that it was not unworthy of the wisdom of God to enclose, from the days of old ui the words of pro- phec}'', a secret evidence which he intended the world should one day see. The Bishop has stated in these few words, with his wonted energ}^ and facility of expression, that further use of prophecy of whicli I am speaking. It is merely a dispute about words, whether the laying up this secret evidence was the primary or the secondary intention of the Giver of prophecy. But it is plain, that when all the notices of the first coming of Christ, that were communicated to ditferent nations, are brought together into our view, and explained by the event, they illustrate, in the most striking manner, both the truth and the importance of Christianity. The gospel appears to be not a solitary unrelated part of the divine economy, but the purpose which God purposed from the beginning ; and Jesus comes according to the declared counsel of heaven to do the will of his Father. The miracles which he wrought derive a peculiar confirmation, from being the very works which ancient prophets had foretold as characteristical of the Messiah. Prophecy and miracle, in this way, lend their aid to one another, and give the most complete assurance which can be desired, that there is no deception : for as miracles could not have justified the claim of Jesus to the character of Messiah, unless ancient predictions had been fulfilled in him, so the miracles which he wrought were an essential part of that fulfilment; and hence arises the peculiar significancy and force of that answer which he made to the disciples of John, when they asked him, " Art thou he that should come ?" " Go," said he, "and show John again those things which ye do hear and see. The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them." He refers to his miracles ; but he mentions them in the very words of Isaiah, thus conjoining with that divine wisdom which shines in all his discourses, the two great arguments by which his disciples in all succeeding ages were to defend their faith. The internal evidence, too, arising from the nature of his undertaking, is very much heightened, when we see that that undertaking was the completion of the plan of Providence. We are often able to vindicate and explain the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, by referring to the manner in which they were sketched out by the preparatory dispensation ; and the intimate connection of the two systems, which enables us to give a satisfactory account of the peculiarities of the law, reflects much dignity upon the gospel. While the kingdoms of this world are spoken of only in so far as the kingdom of the Messiali was to be afiected by their fate, we see the servants of the Almighty preparing the way for the Prince of Peace ; the continued elfusion of the divine Spirit does honour to Jesus ; the prophets arise in long succession to bear witness to him ; and our respect for the sundry intimations of the will of heaven, is concentred in reverence for that scheme towards which all of them tend. In the magnificence of that provision which ushered in the gospel, we recognise the majesty of God ; in the continuity and nice adjustment of its parts, we trace his wisdom ; and its increasing light 92 EXTERNAL EVIDENCES is analogous to that gradual preparation, by which all the works of God advance to maturity. Such is the support which the truth of Christianity derives from the predictions of the Old Testament respecting the Messiah. The argu- ment from prophecy, therefore, was not, as Mr. Gibbon sarcastically and incorrectly says, merely addressed to the Jews as an argu- vientum ad hominum. To those to whom the books of the Old Testament are known chiefly if not entirely by the references made to them in the gospel, it affords much confirmation to their faith, and much enlargement of their views with regard to Christianity. Prideaux — Hartley — Gray — Prettyman's Institutes — Stillingfleet's Orig. Sacrse — Chandler — Hurd — Warburton — Newton — Law — Syke — Kennicott — Randolph's Collation — Ged- des's Prospectus — Lowth de Sacra Pocsi — Home's Preface to Commentary on the Psalms. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 93 CHAPTER VII. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. The support of which we have hitherto spoken proceeds upon those prophecies in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah, which were fulfilled by his appearing in the flesh. Bnt a due attention to the subject leads us much furtlier, and we soon perceive that the birth of Christ, important and glorious as that event was, far from exhausting the significations given by the ancient prophets, only served to introduce other events most interesting to the human race, which were also foretold, which reach to the end of time, and which, as they arise in the order of Providence, are fitted to afford an in- creasing evidence of the truth of Christianity. In entering upon this wide field of argument, which here opens to our view, I think it of importance to direct your attention to the admirable economy with which the prophecies of the Old Testament are disposed. They may be divided into two great classes, as they respect either the temporal condition of the Jews and their neighbours, or that future spiritual dispensation which was to arise in the latter days. As the whole administration of the affairs of the Jews was for many ages conducted by prophecy, there are, in the Old Testament, numberless predictions concerning the temporal condition of them- selves and their neighbours. Some of these predictions were to be fulfilled in a short time, so that the same persons who heard the pro- phecy saw the event. This near fulfilment of some predictions pro- cured credit for others respecting more distant events. " Behold," said the Almighty to the nation of the Jews, " the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare. Before they spring up, I tell you of them."* There are prophecies of the temporal condition of nations, which are at this day fulfilling in the world. The present state of Babylon, of Tyre, of Egypt, of the descendants of Ishmael, and of the Jewish people themselves, have been shown by learned men, and particularly by Bishop Newton, to correspond exactly to the words of ancient prophets: and thus, as the experience of the Jewish nation taught them to expect every event which their pro- phets announced, so the visible continued accomplishment of what these prophets spoke two or three thousand years aso is to us a standing demonstration that they were moved by the Holy Ghost. But this whole system of prophecy was merely a vehicle for pre- • Isaiah xlii. 9. 94 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. serving and conveying to the world the hopes of a future spiritual dis- pensation. It embraced indeed the temporal affairs of the Jews, and of the nations with whom they were particularly connected, because an intermediate preparatory dispensation was established till the better hope should be brought in. But all the prophecies of temporal good and evil were subservient to the promise of the Messiah, and the ful- filment of those prophecies cherished among the nation of the Jews the expectation of that future covenant which was the end of the law. The birth of the Messiah justified this expectation. It did not indeed accomplish all the words of the prophets, but it brought assurance that there should be, in due time, a complete accomplishment. Several great events happened soon after the birth of the Messiah, according to the ancient Scriptures. Other instances of fulfilment are at this day seen in the religious state of the world, and there are parts of the prophecy yet to be fulfilled. We are thus placed in the middle of a great scheme, of which we have seen the beginning and the progress. The conclusion remains to be unfolded. But the cor- respondence to the words of the prophets, both in the events which are past, and in the present state of things, may establish our hope that the mystery of God will be finished ; and the succession of events, as they open in the course of Providence upon the generations of men, gradually explain those parts of the prophecy which were not understood. The prophecies of the temporal state of Babylon, Tyre, Egypt, and other nations which are now fulfilling in the world, are so clear, that any one versant in history may compare the event with the prediction — and I do not know a more pleasing, satisfactory book for this pur- pose than Newton on the Prophecies. But the prophecies of those events in the spiritual state of the world, which were to happen after the birlh of the INIessiah, are in general short and obscure ; and although any person who is cnpable of considering the scheme of ancient prophecy, may be satisfied of its looking forward to the end of all things, yet without some assistance it would be impossible for him to form a distinct conception of what was to follow the birth of the Messiah, and difficult even to refer events as they arise, to Iheir place in the prediction. This kind of obscurity was allowed by God to remain upon the ancient predictions respecting the future fortunes of the Messiah's kingdom, because a remedy was to arise in due time by the advent of that great Prophet who, having fulfilled in his appearance one part of those predictions, became the interprrter of that which remains. The miracles by which he showed that he was a messenger of heaven, and the exact coincidence between the history of his life, and the characters of the Jewish Messiah, were sufficient to procure credit for his interpretation. He was worthy to take the book which Daniel had said was sealed till the time of the end, to open the seals of it, and to explain to the nations of the earth the words which were shut up therein. Thus Jesus stands forth not only as the personage whom ancient prophets had foretold, but as himself a Prophet. The same spirit which had moved them, but whose signi- fications of future events had ceased with Malachi, speaks by that messenger of the covenant whom Malachi had aimounced, and upon whom Isaiah had said the spirit of the Lord should rest : and there is PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 95 Opened in the discourses of Jesus and the writings of his apostles, a series of predictions expHcatory of the dark parts of ancient prophecy, and extending to the consummation of all things. It is not possible to conceive a more perfect unity of design than that which we have now traced in the system of prophecy ; and every human scheme fades and dwindles when compared with the magnificence and extent of this plan — Jesus Christ the corner-stone which connects the old and the new dispensation ; in whom one part of the ancient predictions received its accomplishment, and from whom the other received its interpretation. The spirit of prophecy thus ministers in two distinct methods to the evidence of Christianity. It enclosed in the words and actions of the Old Testament a proof that Jesus was that person whom the Father had sanctified, and sent into the world ; and it holds forth, in the words uttered by Jesus and his apostles, that mark of a divine mission, which all impostors have assumed, and which mankind have often ascribed to those who did not possess it, but which, where it really exists, may be easily distinguished from all false pretensions, and is one of the evidences which the Almighty hath taught us to look for in every messenger of his. He claims it as his prerogative to declare the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that shall be ; he chal- lenges the gods of the nations to give this proof of their divinity ; " Produce your cause, saith the Lord : bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods."* And he hath given this mark of his messengers : " When the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the Lord hath truly sent him."t As Jesus assumed this universal character of a divine messenger, so he was distinguished from other prophets by the clearness, the extent, and the importance of his predictions. And he showed that the spirit was given to him without measure, by exercising the gift of prophecy upon subjects very different from one another, both in their nature, and in their times. He foretold events which seem to be regulated by the caprice of men, and those which depend purely upon the will of God. He foretold some events so near, that we find in Scripture both the prophecy and the fulfilment ; others which took place a few years after the canon of Scripture was closed, with regard to which we learn the complete fulfilment of the prophecy from con- temporary historians ; others which are now carrying forward in the world, with regard to which the fulfilment of the prophecy is a mat- ter of daily observation ; and others which reach to distant periods, and to the consummation of all things, which are still the objects of a Christian's hope, but with regard to which, hope rises in perfect assurance by the recollection of what is past. This is a general view of the prophecies of Jesus and his apostles ; and I recam;nend them to your particular attention and study, because, in my opinion, the evidence of Christianity derives two great advantages from the study of them. The fi7'sl advantages arises from their appearing to be the explication and enlargement of • Isaiah xli. 21, 23 ; xlvi. 9, 10. -j- Jer. xxviii. 9. 96 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. the short obscure predictions contained in the Old Testament with regard to the same events ; such an exphcation as no other person was quahfied to give, and therefore as clear a demonstration of the prophetical spirit of Jesus as if he uttered a series of predictions per- fectly new, yet such an explication as illustrates the intimate connec- tion of the two dispensations. The prophecies of Jesus and his apostles, while they introduce many particulars that are not found in the writings of the ancient prophets, are always consistent with the words spoken by them, referring to their images, and unfolding their dark sayings. The highest honour is, in this way, reflected upon the extent of the scheme of ancient prophecy ; and Jesus, by honouring this scheme, and carrying it forward, confirms his claim to the character of Jewish Messiah, because he speaks in a manner most becoming that great Prophet, who was to be raised up hke unto Moses. The second advantage arising from a particular study of the predictions of Jesus, is this, that all the events, which constitute the history of his rehgion, thus appear to be the fulfilment of prophecy. Besides the support which every one of them in its place gives to the truth of Christianity, all together united as parts of a system,- which had entered into the mind of the Author of our religion, and when they happen, they afford a demonstration that the God of knowledge had put words into his mouth. To perceive distinctly the nature and the importance of this secondary advantage, the four Gospels should be read from beginnhig to end, with a special view to mark the prophecies of Jesus. In doing this, you will set down the many instances in which he discovers a knowledge of the human heart, of the intentions and thoughts of both his friends and his enemies, as of the same order with the gift of prophecy. You will find predictions of common occurrences, and near events, which must have made a deep impression upon those Y/ho lived with him ; and, scattered through all his discourses, you will meet with predictions of remote events, for wliich the fulfilment of the predictions of near events was fitted to procure credit. Out of the many particulars which, upon such a review, may engage 3^our attention, I select the following important objects, as affording a speci- men of the variety of our Saviour's prophecies, and of the manner in which those events which constitute the history of his religion, may be considered as the fulfilment of his predictions ; the prophecies of his death, of his resurrection, of the gift of the Holy Ghost, of the situation and behaviour of his disciples, of the destruction of Jerusalem, of the progress of his religion previous to that period, of the condition of the Jewish nation subsequent to it, and of the final discrimination of the righteous and the wicked. 1. The death of Jesus, that great event which, when considered in the Scripture view of it, is characteristical of the Gospel as the reli- gion of sinners, is the subject of many of our Lord's prophecies. He marks, without hesitation, the time, the place, and the manner of it ; the treachery of one disciple, the denial of another, the desertion of the rest, the sentence of condemnation which the supreme council of the Jewish nation, at a time when Jews were gathered from all corners of the land, was to pronounce in Jerusalem upon an innocent man, whom many of the people held to be a prophet, and the execu- PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 97 tion of tliat sentence by the Gentiles, to whom the rulers of the Jews, jealous as they were of their own authority, and indignant under the Roman yoke, were to deliver the panne). But of all kinds of death Avhich might have been inflicted, the prophecy of Jesus selects one unknown in the land of Judea, and reserved by the Romans for slaves, who, having been distinguished from freemen in their life, were dis- tinguished also in the manner of their death. It is not possible to conceive any events more contingent than those which this prophecy embraces. Yet it was literally fulfilled. When you examine it atten- tively, there are several particulars which you will be delighted with marking, because they constitute an indirect support to the truth of Christianity, arising out of the contexture of the prophecy. Thus, you will find that the prophecy applies to Jesus many minute circum- stances in the Jewish types of the Messiaii, and in this way shows us that as the death of the Messiah had been shadowed forth by the sacrifices of the law, and foretold by Isaiah and Daniel, so the manner of it had, from the beginning, been in the view of the spirit of pro- phecy, and was signified beforehand in various ways. You will admire the magnanimity of that man who came into the world that he might lay down his life, and wiio never courted the favour of the people, or shrunk from the discharge of any duty, although all the circumstances of barbarity that marked his death were fully before his eyes. You will admire the dignity, and the regard to the peace of his country, which restrained Jesus from raising the pity and the indignation of the multitude by publishing his future sufferings to them, and which led him to address all the clear minute predictions of his death to his disciples in private. You will admire the tender- ness and wisdom with which he delayed any such communication even to them, till they had declared a conviction of his being the INIessiah, and then gradually unfolded the dismal subject as they were able to bear it ; and you will perceive the gracious purpose which was promoted by the growing particularity of his prophecy, as the event drew near. " Now," says he, " I tell you before it come, that when it come to pass, ye may believe, that I am he."* 2. The circumstances of his death, every one of which had been foretold by himself, thus served to procure credit for that prophecy of his resurrection, which was always conjoined with them. The ancient prophets had declared that the Messiah was to live for ever: and as both Isaiah and Daniel, who spoke of his everlasting kingdom, had spoken also of his being cut off out of the land of the living, their words implied that he was to rise from the dead. This implication of a resurrection was brought out by our Lord. Conscious of the divine power whicii dwelt in him, he said that on the third day he should rise again ; and in the hearing of all the people, he held forth Jonas as a type of himself. The people recalled his words as soon as he was put to death, for " the chief priestsand Pharisees came together unto Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again :"t and they vainly employed precautions to prevent the fulfihnent of his prophecy. The apostles have left a most natural picture of their own weakness and • John xiii. 19. f Matt, xxvii. 62, 63. 11 Q 98 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. disappointment, by transmitting it upon record to posterity, that tht death of Jesus effaced from their minds his promise of rising again, or at least destroyed in the interval their faith of its being fulfilled. But j^ou will find that both the angels who appeared to the women, and our Lord in his discourses with the disciples, recalled the prophe- cy to their minds ; and, by one expression of John, you may judge of the confirmation which their faith was to receive from the recollection of predictions which had been addressed to themselves, and the fulfil- ment of which they had seen. When the Jews asked a sign of him, he said, " Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews understood him to mean the temple in which they were standing. "But he spake," says John, "of the temple of his body. When, therefore, he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them ; and they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had said."* There is no fact in the history of the Christian religion more important than the resurrection of Jesus. It is that seal of his commission, without which all the others are of none avail ; the assurance to us that the purpose of his death is accom- plished, and the pledge of our resurrection. " If Christ be not risen, our faith is vain." As the evidence of the fact therefore will appear to us, when we proceed to examine it, to be most particular and satisfying, so it was mosi natural that this very important fact should be the subject of prophecy. 3. Our Lord foretold also that he was to ascend into heaven ; and the fulfilment of this prophecy was made an object of sense to the apostles as far as their eyes could reach. But that they might be satisfied there was no illusion, and that the rest of the world might know assuredly that he was gone to the Father, the prophecy of this ascension was connected with the promise of the Holy Ghost, which he said he would send from his Father to comfort the disciples after his departure, to qualify them for preaching his religion, and to ensure the success of their labours. You learn from the book of Acts the fulfilment of this promise; and when you examine the subject the following circumstances will deserve your attention. The mi- raculous gifts poured forth on the day of Pentecost are stated by the apostle Peter as " that which was spoken by the prophet Joel ; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all fiesh."'t The last days is a prophetical expression for the age of the Messiah, which was to succeed the age of the law. It is plain that the prophecy of Joel had not been fulfilled before the day of Pentecost ; for during the greater part of the time that had elapsed between the word of Joel and that day, the prophetical spirit had ceased entirely. His word did receive a visible fulfilment upon that day; and this fulfilment being an event which our Lord had taught his apostles to look for, Peter was entitled to apply the word of Joel to the event which then took place ; and our Lord appears in his promise of the Holy Ghost, as in his other prophecies, to be the true interpreter of ancient predictions. Further, the promise of Jesus does not respect merely the inward influences of the Spirit. These, however essential to the comfort and improvement of man, do not • John ii. 18—23. f Acts ii. 16, 17. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 99 admit of being clearly proved to others, either by the testimony of sense, or by the deductions of reason, and cannot always be distinguish- ed by certain marks from the visions of fanatical men. But the promise of Jesus expresses precisely external visible works, to which the power of imagination does not reach, and with regard to which every spectator may attain the same assurance as with regard to any other object of sense. " These signs," said Jesus before his ascension, « shaU follow them that believe. In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents, and, if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not Imrt them ; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."* It limits a time, within which the faculty of performing such works was to be conferred ; and it chooses the most public place as the scene of their being exhibited. For Jesus, just before he was taken up into heaven, "commanded his apostles that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which," saith he, " ye have heard of me; ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence, "t Lastly, You will be led by the examination of this subject to observe, that when the works performed, in consequence of the gifts conferred upon the day of Pentecost, became palpable to the senses of men, they were, like the miracles of Jesus, the vouchers of a divine commission. Being performed in his name, and in fulfil- ment of his promise, they were fitted to convince the world that he had received power from the Father after his ascension, and that he had given this power to his apostles. These men were, in this way, recommended to the world as sent by Jesus to carry forward the great scheme which he had opened. Full credit was procured for all that they taught, because their works were the signs of those internal operations by which they were inspired with the knowledge, wisdom, and fortitude necessary for their undertaking ; and their works were also the pledges of the fulfilment of that promise which extends to true Christians in all ages, that the Holy Spirit shall be given to those who ask it, according to the measure of their necessities. 4. The fourth subject of our Lord's prophecies which I mentioned, was the situation and the behaviour of his apostles after he should leave them. He never amused them with false hopes; he forewarn- ed them of all the scorn, and hatred, and persecution which they were to expect in preaching his religion : and yet, although he had daily experience of their timidity, and slowness of apprehension, although he foretold that at his death they would forsake him, yet he foretold with equal assurance, that after his ascension they should be his wit- nesses to the ends of the earth ; and he left in the hands of these feeble men, who were to be involved in calamities upon his account, that cause for which he had lived and died, without expressing any ap- prehension that it would suffer by their weakness. " If ye were of the world," he says in his last discourse to them before his death, " the world would love his own, but because ye arc not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. They shall put you out of the synagogues; yea, the time Cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doth God service. • Markxvi. 17, 18. f Acts i. 4, 5. 100 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. And these things will they do unto yon, because tliey have not known the Father, nor me. But these tilings have I told you, that when tlie time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them."* There is in all this a dignity of manner, and a consciousness of divine resources, which exalts Jesus above every other person that appears in history. When we see in the propagation of his religion, the forti- tude, the wisdom, and the eloquence of his servants, their steadfast- ness amidst trials sufficient to shake the firmest minds, and the joy which they felt in being counted worthy to suffer for his name, we remember his words, and we discern the fruits of that baptism, where- with they were baptized on the day of Pentecost. In a heroism, so different from the former conduct of these men, and so manifestly the gift of God, we recognise the spirit which both dictated the prophecy, and brought about the event ; and our Lord's prediction of the situa- tion and behaviour of his apostles, when thus compared with the event, furnishes the most striking illustration of his truth, his candour, his knowledge, and his power. 5. We come now to the longest and most circumstantial of our Lord's prophecies. It respects immediately the destruction of Jerusa- lem ; but we shall find that it embraces also the remaining subjects of prophecy which I mentioned, and, in speaking of them, I mean to follow it as my guide. The prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem was uttered at a time when Judea was in complete subjection to the Romans. A Roman governor resided in Jerusalem with an armed force ; and this state, no longer at enmity with the masters of the world, was regard- ed as a part of the Roman empire. There was it is true, a general indignation at the Roman yoke, a tendency in the minds of the people to sedition and tumult, and a fear in the council lest these sentiments should at some time be expressed with such violence, as to provoke the Romans to take away their place and their nation. It was, in fact, the turbulent spirit, and the repeated insurrections of the Jewish people, which did incense the Romans; and a person well acquaint* d witli the disaffection which generally prevailed, and the character of those who felt it, might foresee that the public tranquillity would not ("■ontinue long, and that this sullen stift'-necked people were preparing for themselves, by their murmurings and violence, more severe chastisements than they had endured, when they were reduced into the form of a Roman province. But although a sagacious enlighten- ed mind, which rose above vulgar prejudices, and looked forward to remote consequences, might foresee such an event, yet the maimer of the chastisement, the signs which were to announce its approach, the measure in which it was to be administered, and the length of time during which it was to continue, — all these were out of the reach of human foresight. There is a particularity in this pro|)hecy, by which it is clearly distinguished from the conjectures of wise men. It embraces a multitude of contingencies depending upon the caju'ice of the people, upon the wisdom of military commanders, upon tlie fury of soldiers. It describes one certain method of doing that which might have been done in many other ways, a method of subduing a rebel- * John. XV. 19; xvi. 2, 3,4. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 101 lions city very different from the general conduct of the Romans, \vho were too wise to destroy the provinces which they conquered, and \'ery opposite to the character of Titus the emperor, under whose command Jerusalem was besieged, one of the mildest and gentlest men that ever lived, who placed at the head of the empire of the world, is called by historians, the love and delight of mankind. The author of a new religion must have been careless of his reputation, and of the success of his scheme, who ventured to foretell such a number of improbable events without knowing certainly that they were to come to pass ; and it required not the wisdom of a man, but the Spirit of the God of knowledge, to foresee that all of them would concur, before the generation that was then alive upon the earth passed away. Yet this prophecy Jesus uttered about forty years before the event. The prophecy was not laid up after it was uttered, like the pretended oracles of the heathen nations, in some repository, where it might be corrected by the event. But, having been brought to the remembrance of those who heard it spoken, by the spirit which Jesus sent into the hearts of his apostles after his ascension, it was in- serted in books which were published before the time of the fulfilment. We know that John lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem, and it is not certain whether he wrote his Gospel before or after that event. But John has omitted this prophecy altogether. Our knowledge of it is derived from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which were carried by the Christian converts into all parts of the world while Jerusalem stood, which were early translated into different languages, which are quoted by writers iu the succeeding age, and were universally held by the first Christians as books of authority, as the standards of faith. In these books thus authenticated to us, we find various intimations of the destruction of Jerusalem, by parables and short hints interwoven in the thread of the history ; and all the three contain the same long particular prophecy, with a small variety of expression, but without the least discordance, or even alteration of the sense. The greatest part of this long prophecy has been most strikingly fulfilled, and there are parts, the fulfilment of which is now going on in the world. We learn the fulfilment of the greater part of this prophecy, not from Christian writers only, but from one author, whose witness is unexceptionable, because it is not the witness of a friend ; and who seems to have been preserved by Providence, in order to transmit to posterity a circumstantial account of the siege. Josephus, a Jew, who wrote a history of his country, has left also a relation of that war in which Jerusalem was destroyed. In the beginning of the war, he was a commander in Galilee. But being besieged by Vespasian, he fled with forty more, after a gallant resistance, and hid himself in a cave. Vespasian having discovered their lurking place, offered them their life. Josephus was willing to accept it. But his companions refused to surrender. With a view to prolong the time, and in hopes of overcoming their obstinacy, he prevailed upon them to cast lots who should die first. The lots were cast two by two : and that God, who disposeth of the lot, so ordered it, that of the forty, thirty-nine were killed by the hands of one another, and one only was left whh Josephus. This man yielded to his entreaties ; and these two, instead 11* 102 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JEStJS. of drawing lots who should kill the other, went together, and offered themselves to Vespasian. The miserable fate of their companions procured them a kind reception ; and from that time Josephus re- mained in the Roman camp, an eye witness of every thing that hap- pened during the siege. He has the reputation of a diligent faithful historian in his other work. And his very particular account of the siege was revised by Vespasian and Titus, and published by their order. The only impeachment that has ever been brought against the veracity of Josephus is, that although his history of the Jews comprehends the period in which our Lord lived, he hardly makes mention of his name ; and, although exact and minute in every thing else, enters into no detail of the memorable circumstances that attend- ed his appearance, or the influence which it had upon the minds of the people. He takes no notice of this prophecy. A Jewish priest, whose silence betrays his enmity to Jesus, certainly did not wish that it should be fulfilled : and yet his history of the siege is a comment upon the prophecy ; every word which our Lord utters receiving the clearest explication, and most plainly meeting its event in the narration of this prejudiced Jewish historian. Archbishop Tillotson, Newton on the prophecies, Lardner, Jortin, Newcome, and many other writers, have made very full extracts from Josephus, and, by setting the narration of the historian over against the prediction of our Lord, have shown the exact accomplishment of the words of the great Prophet, from the record of a man who did not acknowledge his divine mission. These extracts well deserve your study. But it is not necessary, after the labour which so many learned men have bestowed upon this subject, that I should lead you minutely through the parts of the prophecy. There are, however, some circumstances upon which I think it of importance to fix your attention. I mean, therefore, to give a distinct account of the occasion which led our Lord to utter this prophecy ; and, after collecting briefly the chief points respecting the siege, I shall dwell upon the striking prophecy of the progress of Christianity before that period, which Matthew has preserved in his twenty-fourth chapter. Our Lord had uttered in the temple, in the hearing of a mixed multitude, a pathetic lamentation over the distress that awaited the Jewish nation. As he goes out of the temple towards the mount of Olives, the usual place of his retirement, the disciples, struck with the expression he had used, " Behold your house is left unto you deso- late," as if to move his compassion and mitigate the sentence, point out to him, while he passed along, the buildings of the temple, and the goodly stones and gifts with which it was adorned. The great temple which Solomon had built, was destroyed at the time of the Babylonish captivity. Cyrus permitted the two tribes, who returned to Judea, to rebuild the house of their God. And this second temple was repaired and adorned by Herod the Great, who, having received the crown of Judea from the Romans, thought that the most effectual way of overcoming the prejudices, and obtaining the favour of the Jewish people, was by beautifying and enlarging, after the plan of Solomon's temple, the building which had been hastily erected in the reigns of Cyrus and Darius. It was still accounted the second temple, but was so much improved by the preparation which Herod made, PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BTC JESUS. 103 that both Josephus and the Roman historians celebrate the extent, the beauty, and tlie splendour, of the building. And Josephus mentions, in particular, marble stones of a stupendous size in the foundation, and in different parts of the building. The disciples, we may suppose, point out these stones, lamenting the destruction of such a fabric ; or periiaps meaning to insinuate, that it would not be easy for the hand of man to destroy it. But Jesus answered, " Verily, i say unto you, there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." It is a proverbial saying, marking the complete destruction of the temple; and ihere would not;according to the general analogy of language, have been any impropriety in the use of it, if the temple had been rendered unfit for being a place of worship, although piles of stones had been left standing in the court. But, by the providence of God, even this proverbial expression was fulfilled, according to the literal acceptation of the words. Titus was most soUcitous to preserve so splendid a monument of the victories of Rome ; and he sent a message to the Jews who had enclosed them- selves in the temple, that he was determined to save it from ruin. — But they could not bear that the house of their God, the pride and glory of their nation, should fall into the hands of the heathen, and they set fire to the porticoes. A soldier, observing the flames, threw a burning brand in at the window ; and others, incensed at the obsti- nate resistance of the Jews, without regard to the commands or threat- enings of their General, who ran to extinguish the flames, continued to set fire to different parts of it, and at length even to^the doors of the holy place. " And thus," says Josephus, " the temple was burnt to the ground, against the will of Titus." After it was in this way rendered useless, he ordered the foundations, probably on account of the unusual size of the stones, to be dug up. And Rufus, who com- manded the army after his departure, executed this order, by tearing them up with a plough-share ; so truly did Micah say of old, " Zion shall be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest."* The multitude probably pressing around our Lord as he went out of the temple, the disciples forbear to ask any particular explication of his words, till they come to the Mount of Olives. That mount was at no great distance from Jerusalem, and over against the temple, so that any person sitting upon it, had an excellent view of the whole fabric. The disciples, deeply impressed with what they had heard, and anxious to receive the fullest information concerning the fate of the city of their solemnities, now that they are retired from the multitude, come around Jesus upon the mount, and looking down to the temple, say, " Tell us, when shall these things be ; and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world ?"t It is of consequence that you form a clear apprehension of the import of this question. The end of the world, according to the use of that phrase to which our ears are accustomed, means the consummation of all things. And this circumstance, joined with some expressions in the prophecy, has led several interpreters to suppose that the apostles were asking the time of the judgment. But to a Jew, r; owrcKftatovcui^voi, often con- • Micah iii. 12. f Matt. xxiv. 3. 104 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESTJS. veyed nothing more than the end of the age. Time was divided by the Jews into two great periods, the age of the law and the age of tlie Messiah. Tlie conclusion of the one was the beginning of the other, the opening of that kingdom which tlie Jews believed the Messiah was to establish, which was to put an end to their sufierings, and to render them the greatest people upon the earth. The apostles, full of this hope, said to our Lord, immediately before his ascension, " Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" Our Lord used the phrase of his coming, to denote his taking vengeance upon the Jews by destroying their city and temple. " There shall be some standing here," he said, " that shall not taste of death till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."* All that heard him are long since gathered to their fathers, and Jesus has not yet come to judge the world. But John we know, survived the destruction of Jerusa- lem. There are two other places in the New Testament where a phrase almost the same with rj owteXiia. tov aiwwj occurs. And in neither does it signify what we call the end of the world. The apostle to the Hebrews, ix. 26, says, " But now once, trci awttUiu tuv aiww)/, hath Christ appeared." At the conclusion of that dispensation under which the blood of bulls and goats was offered upon the altar of God, " Christ appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself" The apostle to the Corinthians says, " These things are written for our admoni- tion, upon whom are come^ars/.;? rwv aicoi/wi',"t our translation renders it, "the ends of the world." Yet the world has lasted about 1800 years since the apostolic days ; the meaning is, the ends of the ages, the conclusion of the one age, and the beginning of the other, are come upon us ; for we have seen both. It is agreeable, then, to the phraseology of Scripture, and to the expectations of the apostles, to interpret their question here, " What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world ?" as meaning nothing more than the corresponding question, to which an answer, in substance the same, is given in the 13th chapter of Mark, and the 21st of Luke. What shall be the sign when these things, this prophecy of the destruction of the tempfe, shall be fulfilled, or come to pass ? But the language in which the question is proposed in Matthew, suggests to us the sentiment which had probably arisen in the minds of the apostles, after hearing the declaration of our Lord, as they walked from the temple to the Mount of Olives. They con- ceived that the whole frame of the Jewish polity was to be dissolved, that the glorious kingdom of the Messiah was to commence, and that, as all the nations of the earth were to be gathered to this kingdom, and Jerusalem was to be the capital of the world, the temple which now stood, extensive and magnificent as it was, would be too small for the reception of the worshippers, that on this account it was to be laid in ruins, and one much more splendid, more suitable to the dignity of the Messiah, and far surpassing every human work, Avas to be erected in its stead. Possessed with these exalted imaginations, and anticipating their own dignity in being the ministers of this temple, they come to Jesus and say, " Tell us when these things shall be, and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age ?" The * Matt. xvi. 28. f 1 Cor. x. 11. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 105 question consists of two parts. They ask the time, and they ask the signs. Our Lord begins with giving a particular answer to the second question. He afterwards limits the time to the existence of the generation then alive upon the earth. But he represses tlieir curiosity as to tlie day or tiie hour. Of the signs mentioned by our Lord, I shall give a short general view, deriving the account of the fulfilment of his words from the history of the events left us by Josephus, and shall then fix your attention upon that prophecy of the general progress of Christianity before the destruction of Jerusalem, which you will find in the 24lli chapter of Matthew. The first sign is the number of false Christs who were to arise in the interval between the prophecy and the event ; impostors who, finding a general expectation of the Messiah, as the seventy weeks of Daniel were conceived to be accomplished, and a disposition to revolt from the Romans, assumed a character corresponding to the wishes of the people. There is frequent reference to these impostors in the book of Acts ; and Josephus says, that numbers of them were taken under the government of Felix, They led out the deluded people in crowds, promising to show them great signs, and to deliver them from all their calamities, and thus exposed them to be cut to pieces by the Roman soldiers, as disturbers of the peace. Our Lord graciously warns the apostles not to go after these men ; to put no faith in any message which they pretended to bring from him, but to rest satisfied with the directions contained in this prophecy, or hereafter communi- cated to themselves by his Spirit. While he thus preserves his fol- lowers from the destruction which came upon many of the Jews, he enables them, by reading in that destruction the fulfilment of his words, and a proof of his divine character, to derive from the fate of their unwise countrymen an early confirmation of tlieir own faith. The second sign consists of great calamities which were to happen during the interval. The madness of Caligula, who succeeded Tiberius, butchered many of the Jews ; and there was in his reign the rumour of a war, which was likely to be the destruction of the nation. He ordered his statue to be erected in the temple of Jerusalem. Not conceiving why an honour, which was granted to him by the other provinces of the empire, should be refused by Judea ; and not being wise enough to respect the religious prejudices of those who were subject to him, he rejected their remonstrances, and persisted in his demand. The Jews had too high a veneration for the house of the true God, to admit of any thing like divine honours being there paid to a mortal, and they resolved to suffer every distress, rather than to give their countenance to the sacrilege of the emperor. Such was the consternation which the rumour of this war spread through Judea, that the people neglected to till their lands, and in despair waited the approach of the enemy. But the death of Caligula removed their fears, and delayed for some time that destruction which he meditated. Although, therefore, says Jesus, you will find the Jews troubled when these wars arise, as if the end of their state was at hand, be not ye afraid, but know that many things must first be accomplished. What strength was the faith of the apostles to derive from this prophecy, but a few years after our Lord's death, when they heard of rumours R 106 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. of wars, when they beheld the despair of their countrymen, and yet saw tlie cloud dispelled, and the peace of their country restored ! The peace, indeed, was soon interrupted by frequent engagements between the Jewish and heathen inhabitants of many cities in the pro- vince of Syria; by disputes about the bounds of their jurisdiction, amongst the governors of the different tetrarchies or kingdoms into which the land of Palestine was divided ; and by the wars arising from the quick succession of emperors, and the violent competitions for the imperial diadem. It was not the sword only that filled with calamity this disastrous interval. The human race, according to the words of this prophecy, suffered under those judgments which pro- ceed immediately from heaven. Josephus has mentioned famine and pestilence, earthquakes in all places of the world where Jews resided, and one in Judea attended with circumstances so dreadful and so unusual, that it was manifest, he says, the whole power of nature was disturbed for the destruction of men. The third sign is the persecution of the Christians. The sufferings of which we read in the Epistles and the Acts were early aggravated by the famines, and pestilence, and earthquakes with which God at this time afflicted the earth. The Christians were regarded as the causes of these calamhies ; and the heathen, without inquiring into the nature of their religion, but viewing it as a new pestilential super- stition, most offensive to the gods, tried to appease the divine anger which manifested itself in various judgments, by bringing every indignity and barbarity upon the Christians. The example was set by Nero, who, having in the madness of his wickedness set fire to Rome that he might enjoy the sight of a great city in flames, turned the tide of that indignation, which the report excited, from himself against the Christians, by accusing them of this atrocious crime. He found the people not unwilling to believe any thing of a sect whom they held in abhorrence : and both in this, and in many other instances, the Christians suffered the most exquisite torments for crimes not their own, and as the authors of calamities which they did not occasion. The persecution which they endured has been well called by one of the oldest apologists for Christianity,* a war against the name, proceeding not from hatred to them as individuals, but from enmity to the name which they bore. " Ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." The fourth sign is the apostacy and treachery of many who had borne this name. Although persecution naturally tends to unite those who are persecuted, and although the religion of Jesus can boast of an innumerable company of martyrs, who in the flames witnessed a good confession, yet there were some in the earliest ages who made shipwreck of faith, and endeavoured to gain the favour of the heathen magistrates by informing against their brethren. This apostacy is often severely reprehended in the epistles of Paul ; and the Roman historian speaks of a multitude of Christians who were convicted of bearing the name, upon the evidence of those who confessed first.t It cannot surprise any one who considers the weakness of human nature, that such examples did occur. But it must appear very much * Justin Martyr. f Tac. Ann. xv. 44, PREDICTIONS DELIVEIIED BY JESUS. 107 to the honour of Jesus, that he adventures to utter such a prophecy. He is not afraid of sowing jealousy and distrust amongst his followers. He knew tliat many were able to endure the trial of affliction, and he leaves the chati' to be separated from the wheat. The fifth sign is the multitude of false teachers, men who, either from an attachment to the law of Moses, or from the pride of false philosophy, corrupted the simplicity of the Gospel. This perversion appeared in the days of the apostles. Complaints of it, and warnings against it, are scattered through all their epistles. Neither the sword of the persecutor, nor the wit of the scorner has done so much injury to the cause of Christianity, as the strifes and idle disputes of those who bear his name. Many in early times, were shaken by the errors of false prophets. Improper sentiments and passions were cherished ; the union of Christians was broken, and the religion of love and peace became an occasion of discord. But these corruptions, however dis- graceful to Christians, are a testimony both of the candour and the divine knowledge of the author of the Gospel; and even those who perverted his religion fulfilled his words. We have now gone through those signs which announced the destruction of Jerusalem, and we are come to the circumstances, marked in the prophecy, which happened during the siege. The first is, Jerusalem being compassed with armies, or, as Mat- thew expressed it, the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place. There were commonly engraved upon the Roman standards, after the times of the republic, the images of those emperors whom admiration or flattery had trans- lated into the number of Gods. The soldiers were accustomed to swear by these images, to worship them, and to account them the gods of battle. The Jews, educated in an abhorrence of idolatry, could not bear that images, before which men thus bowed, should be brought within the precincts of their city ; and soon after the death of our Lord, they requested a Roman general, Vitellius, who was leading troops through Judea against an enemy of the emperor, to take another road, because, said they, it is not tat^iov ^ij.w to behold from our city any images. With strict propriety, then, the dark expression of Daniel, which had not till that time been understood, is interpreted by our Lord as meaning the offensive images of a great multi- tude of standards brought within that space, a circumference of two miles round the city which was accounted holy, in order to render the city desolate ; and he mentions this as the signal to his followers to fly from the low parts of Judea to the mountains. It may appear to you too late to think of flying, after the Roman armies were seen from Jerusalem. But the manner in which the siege was conducted justified the wisdom of this advice. A few years before Titus destroyed Jerusalem, Cestius Gallus laid siege to it ; he might have taken the city if he had persevered ; but without any reason that was known, says Josephus, he suddenly led away his forces. And after his departure many fled from the city as from a sinking ship. Vespasian, too, was slow in his approaches to the city ; and by the distractions which at that time took place in the government of Rome, was frequently diverted from executing his purpose ; so that the Christians, to whom the first appearance of Cestius's army brought 108 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. an explanation of the words of Jesus, by following his directions, escaped entirely from the carnage of the Jews. Our Lord warns his disciples of the imminency of the danger, and urges them, by various expressions, to the greatest speed in their flight. The reason of this urgency is explained by Josephiis. After Titus sat down before Jerusalem, he surrounded the city with a wall, which was finished in three days, so that none could escape ; and factions were by that time become so violent, that none were allowed to surrender. The party called zealots, who in their zeal for the law of Moses, and in the hope of receiving deliverance from heaven, thought it their duty to resist the Romans to the last extremity, put to death all who attempted to desert, and thus assisted tlie enemy in enclosing an immense mul- titude within this devoted city. With what gracious foresiglit does the divine prophet guard his followers against this complication of evils, and repeat his warning in the most striking words, in order to convince all who paid regard to what he said, that their only safety lay in flight ! A second circumstance by which our Lord marks this siege, is the unparalleled distress that was then to be endured, " Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of this world to this time ; no, nor ever shall be." It is a very strong expression, of itself sufficient to distinguisli this prophecy from conjecture. And the expression, strong as it appears, is so strictly applicable to the subject, that we find almost the same words in Josephus, who cer- tainly did not copy them from Jesus. " In my opinion," he says, " all the calamities which ever were endured since the beginning of the world were inferior to those which the Jews now suftered. Never was any city more wicked, and never did any city receive such pun- ishment. Without was the Roman army, surrounding their walls, crucifying thousands before their eyes, and laying waste their coun- try : within were the most violent contentions among the besieged, frequent bloody battles between different parties, rapine, fire, and the extremity of famine. Many of the Jews prayed for the success of the Romans, as the only method to deliver them from a more dread- ful calamity, the atrocious violence of their civil dissensions." A third circumstance mentioned by our Lord, is the shortening of the siege. Josephus computes that there fell, during the siege, by the hands of the Romans, and by their own faction, 1,100,000 Jews. Had the siege continued long, the whole nation would have perished. But the Lord shortened the days for the elect's sake : the elect, that is, in scripture language, the Christians, both those Jews within the city, whom this fulfilment of the words of Jesus was to convert to Chris- tianity, and those Christians who, according to the directions of their Master, had fled out of the city at the approach of the Roman army,, and were then living in the mountains. The manner in which the days were shortened is most striking. Vespasian committed the con- duct of the siege to Titus, then a young man, impatient of resistance, jealous of the honour of the Roman army, and in huste to return from the conquest of an obscure province to the capital of the empire. He prosecuted the siege with vigour ; he invited the besieged to yield, by offering them peace ; and he tried to intimidate them, by using, contrary to his nature, every species of cruelty against those who fell PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 109 into bis hands. But all his vigour, and all his arts, would have been in vain, had it not been lor the madness of those within. They fought with one another; tliey burned, in their fury, magazines of provi- sions suffieient to last them for years; and they deserted with a fool- ish confidence strong holds, out of which no enemy could have dragged them. After they had thus delivered their city into his hands, 'I'itus, when he was viewing it, said, " God has been upon our side. Neither the hands nor the machines of men could have been of any avail against those towers. But God has pulled the Jews out of them, that he might give them to us." It was impossible for Titus to restrain the soldiers, irritated by an obstinate resistance, from executing their fury against the besieged. But liis native clemency spared the Jews in other places. He would not allow the senate of Antioch, that city in \vhich the disciples were first called Christians, to expel the Jews; for where, said he, shall these people go, now that we have destroyed their city ? Titus was the servant of God to execute his vengeance on Jerusalem. But when the measure of that vengeance was ful- filled, the compassion of this amiable prince was employed to restrain the wrath of man. " The Lord shortened the days." A fourth circumstance is, the number of false Christs, men, of whom we read in Josephus, who, both during the siege and after it, kept up the spirits of the people, and rendered them obstinate in their resistance, by giving them hopes that the Messiah was at hand to de- liver them out^f all their calamities. The greater the distress was, the people were the more disposed to catch at this hope ; and, there- fore, it was necessary for our Lord to warn his disciples against being deluded bv it. The last circumstance is, the extent of this distress. Our Lord has employed a bold figure. But the boldest of his figures are always literallV true : " As the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be : For wheresoever the carcase is, there shall the eagles be gathered together." The Roman army, who were at this time the servants of the Son of man, entered on the east side of Judea, and carried their devastation westward; so that, in this grand image, the very direc- tion of the ruin, as well as the suddenness of it, is painted : and it extended to every place where Jews were to be found. A gold or silver eagle, borne on the top of a spear, belonged to every legion, and was'always carried along with it. Wheresoever the carcase — the Jewish people who were judicially condenmed by God — was, there were also those eagles. There was no part of Judea, says Jo- sephus, which did not partake of the miseries of the capital ; and his history of the Jewish war ends with numbering the thousands who fell in other places of the world also by the Roman sword. I have thus led you, as particularly as appears to me to be neces- sary ,-through the prophecy of our Lord respecting the signs, which announced'^the destruction of Jerusalem, and the circumstances which attended the siege; and I wish now to fix your attention upon a par- ticular prediction interwoven in this prophecy, concerning the pro- gress of Christianity previous to that period, both because the sulject renders it interesting, and because the place which our Lord has 12 110 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. given it in this prophecy, opens a most instructive and enlarged view of the economy of the divine dispensations. 6. The prediction is — " And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world, for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end" of the Jewish state "come." We find our Lord always speaking with confidence of the establish- ment of his religion in the world. It is a confidence which could not reasonably be inspired by any thing he beheld : multitudes following him out of curiosity, but easily offended, and at length demanding his crucifixion — a few unlearned, feeble men, affectionately attached indeed to his person, but with very imperfect apprehensions of his religion, and devoid of the most likely instruments of spreading even their own apprehensions through the world — a world which hated him while he lived, and which he knew was to hate his disciples after his death — a world, consisting of Jews, wedded to their own religion, and abhorring his doctrine as an impious attempt to supersede the law of Moses ; and of heathens, amongst whom the philosophers, full of their own wisdom, despised the simplicity of the gospel, and the vulgar, devoted to childish abominable superstitions, and averse from the spiritual worship of the gospel, were disposed to execute the vengeance of jealous malignant deities upon a body of men who refused to offer incense at their altars — a world, too, in which every kind of vice abounded — in which the passions of men demanded indulgence, and spurned at the restraint of the holy commandment of Jesus. Yet in these circumstances, with such obstacles, our Lord, conscious of his divine character, and knowing that the Spirit was given to him without measure, foretells, with perfect assurance, that his gospel shall be preached in all the world. Had he fixed no time, this prophecy, bold as it is, might have been regarded as one of the acts by which an impostor tries to raise the spirits of his followers ; and we should have heard it said, that, instead of a mark of the spirit of prophecy, there was here only the sagacity of a man, who, aware of the wonderful revolutions in the opinions and manners of men, trusting that, in some succeeding age, after other systems had in their turn been exploded, his system might become fashionable, had ven- tured to say, that it should be preached in all the world, and left the age which should see this publication to convert an indefinite expres- sion into an accomplished prophecy. But here is nothing indefinite — a pointed, precise declaration, whicli no impostor, who was anxious about the success of his system, would have hazarded, and concerning the truth of which, many of that generation amongst whom he lived remained long enough upon earth to be able to judge. The end, by the connection of the words with the context, means the conclusion of the age of the law ; and it is still more clearly said, in the 13th chapter of Mark, in the middle of the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusa- lem, " But the Gospel must first be published to all nations." Now, the destruction of Jerusalem happened within forty years after the death of our Saviour, so that we arc restricted to this space of time in speaking of the fulfilment of the prophecy. We learn from the book of Acts, that many thousands were converted soon after the day of Pentecost, and that devout Jews out of every nation under heaven, PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. Ill were witnesses of the miraculous effusion of the Holy Ghost. These men, all of whom were amazed, and some of whom were converted, by what they saw, could not fail to carry the report home, and thus prepared distant nations for receiving those who were better qualified, and more expressly commissioned, to preach the gospel. After the death of StephiMi, there arose a great persecution against the ciiurch of Jerusalem, which by this time iiad multiplied exceedingly ; and they " were scattered abroad tlirough the regions of Judea and Samaria ; and they travelled as far as Pncenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch; and the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed."* The book of Acts is chietly an account of the labours of the Apostle Paul; and we see this one apostle, to adopt the words of a fellow- labourer of his, a preacher both in the East, and to the utmost boundaries of the West, planting churches in Asia and Greece, and travelling from Jerusalem to lUyricum, a tract which has been computed to be not less than 2000 miles. If such were the labours of one, what must have been accomplished by the journey- ings of all the twelve, who, taking different districts, went forth to fulfil the last command of their master, by being his witnesses to the uttermost ends of the earth. The Apostle Paul says, in his epistle to the Romans, " that their faith was spoken of throughout all the world ;" and to the Colossians, " that the word which they had heard was by that time preached to every creature." We know certainly that Paul preached the gospel in Rome ; and such was the effect of his preaching that, seven years before the destruction of Jerusa- lem, Tacitus says there was an immense number of Christians in that city.t From t!ie capital of the world the knowledge of Christianity was spread, like all the improvements in art and science, over the world ; that is, according to the common sense of the phrase, through- out the Roman empire. When the whole known world was governed by one prince, the communication was easy. In every part of the empire garrisons were stationed — roads were opened — messengers were often passing — and no country then discovered was too distant to hear the gospel of the kingdom. It is generally agreed, that with- in the forty years which I mentioned, Scythia on the north, India on the east, Gaul and Egypt on the west, and Ethiopia on the south, had received the doctrine of Christ: and we know that the island of Britain, which was then regarded as the extremity of the earth, the most remote and savage province, was frequently visited during that time by Roman emperors and their generals. It is even said that the gospel \vas preached publicly in London ten years before the destruc- tion of Jerusalem. As far, then, as our information goes, whether we colltict it from the book of Acts, from the occasional mention made by heatlien historians of a subject upon which they bestowed little attention, or l>om the concurring testimony of the oldest Christian historians, the word of Christ was literally fulfilled ; and you have, in the sliort space of time to which he limits the fulfilment of this word, a striking proof of his prophetic spirit. But it is not enough to attend to the fulfilment of this prophecy. The place which it holds, and the manner in which it is expressed, * Acts viii. 1 ; xL 19, 20. f Tacit. Ann. lib. .w. 44. 112 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. suggest to us something further. The gospel, at whatever time it be pubhshed, is a witness to those who hear it, of the being, the provi- dence, and the moral government of God. But, as it is said, "it shall be preached to all the world, for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end come," we are led to consider that particular kind of witness which the preaching of the gospel, before the end of the Jew- ish state, afforded to all nations ; and it is here, I said, that there opens to us a most instructive and enlarged view of the economy of the divine dispensations. Had it not been for this early and universal preaching, the destruc- tion of Jerusalem by Titus would have appeared to the world an event of the same order with the destruction of any other city. They might have talked of the obstinacy of the besieged — of the fury of the conquerors — of the unexampled distress which was endured ; but it would not have appeared to them that there was in all this any thing divine, any other warning than is suggested by the ordinary fortune of war. But when the gospel was first published, it was a witness to all nations, that in the end of the Jewish state there was a fulfilment of the prophecy — a punishment of infidelity — and the ter- mination of the law of Moses. 1. It was a witness of the fulfilment of the prophecy. Wherever the first preachers of Christianity went, they carried the gospels along with them, as the authentic history of Him whom they preached. We have reason to think, that in many parts of the world the three gos- pels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, were translated into the language of the country, or into the Latin, which was generally understood, before Jerusalem was destroyed. The early Christians, then, in the most distant parts of the world, had in their hands the prophecy be- fore the event. The Roman armies, and the messengers of the em- pire, would soon transmit a general account of the siege. The history of Josephus, written and published by the order of Vespasian and Titus, would transmit the particulars to some at least of the most illustrious commanders in distant provinces ; and thus, while all who named the name of Christ would learn the fact, that Jerusalem was destroyed, they who were inquisitive might learn also the circum- stances of the fact, and by comparing the narration which they received, with the prophecy of which they had been formerly in possession, would know assuredly that he who had uttered that prophecy was more than man. There are still great events to happen in the history of the Christian church, which we trust will brins; to those who shall be permitted to see them, a full conviction of the divine character of Jesus. But it was wisely ordered, that the earliest Christians should receive this long prophecy before it came to pass, that the faith of those who had not seen the Lord's Christ, might, at a time when education, authority, and example, were not on the side of that faith, be confirmed by the event; and that all the singular circumstances of this siege might afford to the nations of the earth, in the begin- nings of the gospel, a demonstration that Jesus spake the truth. 2. A witness of the punishment of infidelity. The destruction of Jerusalem was foretold, not merely to give an example of the divino knowledge of him who uttered the prophecy, but because the Jews deserved that destruction. The crime which brought it upon them is PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 113 intimated in many of our Lord's parables, and is declared clearly in other passages, so that those who were in possession of the prophecy could not mistake the cause. All the nations of the earth to whom the gospel was preached, knew that the Jews had killed the Lord Jesus with this horrid imprecation, " His blood be upon us, and upon our children ;" that they had rejected all the evidences of the truth of Christianity which were exhibited in their own land, and not con- tent with despising the gospel, had stirred up the minds of the heathen against the disciples of Jesus, and appeared, so long as their city ex- isted, the most bitter enemies of the Christian name. The nations of the earth saw this obstinacy and barbarity recompensed in the very manner which the Author of the gospel foretold, and having his pre- dictions in their hands, they beheld his enemies taken in the snare which he had announced. The mighty works which he did upoi> earth were miracles of mercy, by which he meant to win the hearts of mankind. But the execution of his threatenings against a nation of enemies was a miracle of judgment. And the unparalleled cala- mities which the Jews, according to his words, endured, were a warn- ing from heaven to all that heard the gospel, not to reject the counsel of God against themselves. 3. A witness that, in the destruction of Jerusalem, there was the termination of the law of Moses. While many Jews persecuted the Christians, there were others who attempted by reasoning, to impose upon them an observance of the law of Moses. They said that it was impious to forsake an institution confessedly of divine original, and that no subsequent revelation could diminish the sanctity of a temple built by God, or abolish the offerings which he had required to be presented there. You find this reasoning most ably combated in the Epistles of Paul, and particularly in the Epistle to the He- brews. But the arguments of the apostle did not completely coun- terbalance the evil done by the Judaizing teachers, to the cause of Christ. jNLany were disturbed by the sophistry of these men in the exercise of their Christian liberty; and many were deterred from embracing the gospel, by the fear of being brought under the yoke of the Jewish ceremonies. Some signal interposition of Providence was necessary to disjoin the spiritual universal religion of Jesus from the carnal local ordinances of the law of Moses, and to afford entire satisfaction to the minds of those who wished for that disjunction. The destruction of Jerusalem was that interposition ; and the general publication of the gospel before that event, led men both to look for it as the solution of their doubts, and to rest in it after it happened, as the declaration from heaven that the ceremonial law was finished. Th>e service of the temple could not continue after one stone of the temple was not left upon another ; the tribes could no longer assemble at Jerusalem after the city was laid in ruins ; and that bondage, un- der which the Jewish Jiation wished to bring the Christians, ceased after the Jews were scattered over the face of the earth. And thus we are enabled, by the place which this prophecy holds, to mark a beautiful consistency, and a mutual dependency in the reve- lations with which God hath favoured the world, — the manifold wis- dom of God conspicuous in the whole economy of religion. The Alaiightv committed to Abraham and his descendants the hope of the 12* S 114 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. Messiah, and the law was a school-master to bring men to Christ. When he who was the end of the law appeared, he appealed to Moses and the prophets as testifying of him, and he claimed the cha- racter of that prophet whom they had announced. But the purpose of the law being fulfilled by his appearance, it was no longer neces- sary that the preparatory dispensation with its appurtenances should continue. He gave notice, therefore, of the conclusion of the age of the law, and as that age began and was conducted with visible sym- bols of divine power, so with like symbols it was finished. The de- claration of these symbols, published to the world in the gospels, prevented them from looking upon the event with the astonishment of ignorance, and taught them to connect this awful ending of the one age with the character of that age which then commenced. Having seen a period elapse sufficient for the faith of Christ to gain proselytes in many countries, they saw the temple of Jerusalem by an interpo- sition which was the literal fulfilment of the words of Christ taken down, and were thus assured that the hour was indeed come at which ancient prophets had more obscurely hinted, and which Jesus had declared iu express words as not very distant, when men were not to worship the Father at Jerusalem, but when the true worshippers, every one from his place, should worship God in spirit and in truth. The eifect of the event, thus interpreted by the prophecy, was power- ful and instantaneous. It furnished the earliest Christian fathers with an unanswerable argument against the Judaizing teachers : it solved the doubts of those who were stumbled by their reasonings: it re- moved one great objection which the Gentiles had to the gospel : and when the wall of partition was thus removed, numbers were " turned from idols to serve the living God." 7. I mentioned as the next subject of the predictions of Jesus, the condition of the Jewish nation subsequent to the destruction of their city. You may mark first the immediate consequences of the siege. " Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ; and then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven." It seems to be plain that these expressions point to the consequences of the siege, for they are thus introduced, " immediately after the tribulation of those days," i. e. the distress endured during the siege, and as if on purpose to show us that the event pointed at was not very distant, it is said a few verses after, " This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled." To perceive the propriety of using such expressions in this place, you will recollect that symbolical language of which we spoke formerly,— dictated by necessity in early times, when the conceptions and the words of men were few, — retained iu after times partly from habit, and partly to render speech more signi- ficant,— universally used in eastern countries, — and abounding in the writings of the prophets, who, speaking under the influence of 'uspira- tiou, full of the events which they foretold, and elevated above the ordinary tone of their minds, employ a richness and pomp of imagery which exalts our conceptions of the importance of what they say, but at the same time increases the obscurity natural to prophecies, and PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 115 made the people whom they addressed often call their discourses dark sayings. This eastern imagery, which pervades the prophetical style, is especially remarkable when the rise or fall of kingdoms is foretold. The images are then borrowed from the most splendid objects; and as in the ancient mode of writing by hieroglyphics, the sun, the moon, and stars, being bodies raised above the earth, were used to represent kingdoms and princes, so in the prophecies of their calamhies, or prosperity, changes upon the heavenly bodies, bright light, and thick darkness came to be a common phraseology. Of the punishment which God was to inflict on Judea, he says by Jeremiah, *' I will stretch out my hand against thee and destroy thee ; she hath given up the ghost ; her sun is gone down, while it is yet day."* Of Egypt, by Ezekiel, " All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and make darkness over thy land, saith the Lord God."t So by Joel, " The earth shall quake before them, the heavens shall tremble ; the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining ; and the Lord shall utter his voice before his army."| And when God promises deliverance and victory to his people, it is in these beautiful words, " Thy sun shall no more go down, neither shall thy moon withdraw itself. But the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold."§ It was most natural for the Messiah of the Jews to introduce this uniform language of former prophets in foretelling the dissolution of their state ; and all that he says was fulfilled, according to the appro- pi'iated use of that language, immediately after the siege. For the city was desolated ; the temple was burnt ; that ecclesiastical consti- tution which the Romans had tolerated after Judea became a province of the empire was dissolved ; the Sanhedrim no longer assembled : the office of the High Priest could no more be exercised according to the commandment of God ; every privilege which had distinguished the people of the Jews ceased ; the sceptre, in appearance as well as in reality, departed from Judah, and the very forms of the dispensation given by Moses came to an end. As changes upon the kingdoms of the earth are produced by the all-ruling providence of God, so the ancient prophets often represent him in their figurative language, as coming in the clouds of heaven to execute vengeance upon a guilty nation ; and Daniel applies this language]! to the exertion of the power of the Son of Man, when he was to take away the domhiion of the four beasts whom Daniel had seen in his vision, and to give the kingdom to the saints of the Most High. You find our Lord referring to this expression, which was familiar to every Jew. Immediately after the distress of the siege, you shall see the sign of the Son of man in heaven. The sign which you have been taught to look for, is not a comet, or meteor, a won- derful appearance in the air to astonish the ignorant : it is the Son of man employing the Roman armies as his servants, to execute ven- geance upon those who crucified him, and demonstratvig to the world, by the complete dissolution of the Jewish state, that all power is com- mitted to him. * Jer. XV. 6. 9. f Ezek. xxxii. 8. + Joel ii. 10, 11. ^ Isaiah h. 20 ; xxx. 26. I Dan. vii. 13, 14, 27. 116 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. The first part, then, of our Lord's prophecy concerning the condition of the Jewish people, subsequent to the siege, although expressed in sublime and figurative language, may be understood, by the analogy of the prophetical style, to mean, that the political and ecclesiastical con- stitution of Judea was to be annihilated immediately after that event. But you may observe in Luke another prophecy concerning their condhion, reaching to a remote period, and marking events in their nature, most contingent. "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,"* Not only shall the city be taken, and the constitution be dissolved, and many Jews fall by the edge of the sword, and many be led captive into all na- tions; but Jerusalem shall belong to the Gentiles, and be used by them in a contemptuous manner till the times of the Gentiles be ful- filled. As this prediction, when taken in connexion with other pas- sages of Scripture, means a great deal more than is obvious at first sight, and as the present state of the Jews is one of the strongest visible arguments for the truth of Christianity, I shall lay before you the history of Jerusalem since it was taken, the condition of the Jewish people during the desolation of their city, and that prospect of a better time which is intimated in the concise expression of our Lord. The history of Jerusalem from the time of its being destroyed by Titus till this day, is a literal fulfilment of the expression, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles." The emperor Adrian con- ceived the design of rebuilding Jerusalem about forty-seven years after its destruction. He planted a Roman colony there, and in place of the temple of the God of the Jews, he erected a temple to Jupiter. The Jews, who inhabited the other parts of Judea, inflamed by this insulting act of sacrilege, engaged in open rebellion against tlie Romans, and assembling in vast multitudes, got possession of their city, and kept it for a short time. Bat Adrian soon expelled them, demolished their towns and castles, desolated the land of Judea, and scattered those who survived over the face of the earth. He re-es- tablislied the Roman colony in Jerusalem, gave it a new name, and forbade any Jew to enter it. Three hundred years after the death of our Saviour, Constantine, the first Roman emperor who embraced Christianity, built many splendid Christian churches in this Roman colony, and dispersed the Jews who attempted to disturb the Chris- tians in their worship. Within thirty years after the death of Con- stantine, the Emperor Julian, who is known by the name of the Apos- tate, because, although he had been bred a Christian, he became a heathen, out of hatred to the Christians, and with a view to defeat the prophecy, invited the body of the Jewish people scattered through the empire, to return to their city ; and professing to lament the oppression which they had endured, gave orders for reb'ailding their temple. His lieutenants did begin. But, says the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, whose respectable authority there is no reason in this instance to question, balls of fire, bursting forth near the foundation, made it impossible for the workmen to approach th.e place, and the enterprise was laid aside. t Julian did not reign above two years; and as all the emperors who succeeded him were Christians, no at- • Luke xxi. 24. | Aram. Marcel, lib. xxiii. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 117 tempt was ever made to rebuild the temple, and the Jews were prohibit- ed from living in the city. It was only by stealth, or by bribing the guards, that they obtained a sight of the ruins of their temple. In the year 637, Jerusalem was taken by the successors of tlie great impostor Mahomet. A mosque was built upon the very spot where the lenjple of Solomon had stood ; and this mosque was afterwards so much enlarged and beautified, that it became the resort of the Mahometans in the adjoining countries, in the same manner as the temple had been of the Jews. Since that time, it has passed, in the succession of con- quests made by different nations and tribes, through the hands of the Turks, the Egyptians, and the Mamelukes. It was for some time in possession of Christians, who, having marched from Europe at the era of the Crusades, to deliver their brethren in the holy land from oppression, and to rescue the sepulchre of our Lord out of the hands of the Mahometans, took Jerusalem, and established a kingdom which lasted about a century. The Christian forces were at length expelled ; the Mamelukes, and after them the Ottoman Turks regained the city, and till this day the Mahometan worship is established there. Chris- tians who are drawn thither by reverence for the place where our Lord lay, are admitted to reside ; and their worship is tolerated upon their paying a large tribute. But hardly any Jews are to be seen in the city. They consider it as so much defiled by the Mahometans and Christians, that they choose rather to worship God in any other place ; they are persecuted by the reigning power. And the poverty of the city does not afford them much temptation in the way of gain to counterbalance the inconveniencies to which they would be obliged to submit if they attempted to live there. Jerusalem, then, is still trodden down of the Gentiles. During the seventeen hundred years that have elapsed since it was destroyed by Titus, the Jews have never been quietly settled there. It has, with hardly any interrup- tion, belonged to Gentile nations ; and it has received every thing which the Jews account a pollution. You will attend next to the condition of the Jewish people during this desolation of their city. Amongst the many striking circum- stances in the history of the ancient Jews, every intelligent observer will reckon the frequent dispersions of that unhappy people. Most other nations, when subdued by a warlike or powerful neighbour, have continued to inhabit some portion of their ancient territory. They have either adopted the laws and manners of their conquerors, and in process of time have been so completely incorporated with them, as not to form a distinct body, or if the cruel policy of the con- querors marked out for them a humbler station, they have descended from their former rank of freemen, without changing their climate, and have remained as servants in the land of which they were once the masters. But the conquerors of Judea in all ages, not content with the subjection of the inhabitants, transplanted them into other countries, and in distant lands marked out the cities which they were to possess, and the fields which they were to cultivate. Thus Esar- haddon, king of Assyria, took away the ten tribes of Israel, and planted them beyond the river Euphrates, in the cities of the Medes. Nebuchadnezzar, one hundred and thirty years after, carried the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin captive to Babylon ; and the Romans 118 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. also at a later period led the Jews captive into all nations. Whatever were the motives which led the enemies of the Jews to adopt this singular system of policy, in following it out, they only fulfilled the appointment of heaven : and the kings of Assyria and Babylon, and the emperors of Rome, although they meant it not so in their hearts, yet by the peculiar sufferings which they brought upon the captive nation, were the instruments of accomplishing the prophecies con- tained in its sacred books. Moses, amongst other curses which were to overtake the children of Israel in case of disobedience, mentions this : " I will make thy cities waste, and I will bring the land into desolation ; and thine enemies which dwell therein shall be astonished at it. The Lord shall bring against thee a nation from far, and he shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and fenced walls come down. And ye shall be plucked off the land whither thou goest to possess it ; and the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other."* The frequent captivities and dispersions of the Jews corresponded exactly to the words of the curse ; and this singular punishment has been repeated as often as the sins of the nation called for the judgments of heaven. It might have been expected that, by these frequent dispersions, the whole race of the Jews would be confounded amongst other na- tions. But it is most remarkable, that although distinguished from all other people by being scattered over the face of the earth, they remain distinguished also by their religion and customs ; and although every where found, they are every where separated from those around them. I speak not of the ten tribes carried away by Esarhaddon, who were so far estranged from the true God before they left their own land, that they easily adopted the idolatry of the nations to which they were led captive, and so ceased to be a people.t But I speak of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, composing what was properly called the kingdom of Judah, which adhered to the family of David after Israel had rebelled against them, to which the promise of the Messiah had been restricted by the patriarch Jacob, and in which the fulfilment of the prophecies concerning the fortunes of the Jewish nation is to be looked for. Now we know that when Judah was carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon, the captives did not worship the gods of the conquerors. Daniel and other great men were raised up by God to preserve the spirit of piety, and the forti- tude of the servants of heaven. And by a concurrence of circum- stances which the providence of God combined to fulfil his pleasure, those who were for the God of Israel received an invitation to return to Jerusalem, and to rebuild the temple. The edict of Cyrus king of Persia contained these words :X " The Lord of heaven hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem. Who is there among you of all his people ? His God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusa- lem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel." It was under the character of the servants of God, by which character they were distinguished from their idolatrous neighbours, that the Jews returned ; and the calamities which they had endured * Levit. xxvi. 31, 32; Deut. xxviii. passim. ■\ Buchanan's Christian Researches. t Ezra i. 2, 3. PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 119 during their captivity, seem to have cured that proneness to idolatry, which the more ancient prophets so often reprove. All that returned are spoken of in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah as zealous for the worship of the true God. Their descendants, who settled and multi- plied in the Holy Land, never sliowed any inclination to worship idols. They endured a severe persecution under Antiochus, because they would not submit to the worship which he prescribed ; and one of the causes which incensed the Romans against them, was their abhorrence of the gods of the empire. Since their dispersion by Titus and by Adrian, they have never joined in heathen. Christian, or Ma- hometan worship. Tiieir rites, burdensome as they are, and con- temptible as they appear in the eyes of strangers, have been religiously observed by the whole nation. A sullen, uncomplying covetous spirit has conspired with the singularity of their rites to render them odious and ridiculous. The character of a Jew is marked in every corner of the earth ; and one can find no words which so literally express the condition of this people, as the words uttered more than three thousand years ago by their own lawgiver. " These curses shall come upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever ; and thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a by-word among all the nations whither the Lord shall lead thee."* In this wonderful manner have the Jews, whose native land is still trodden down of the Gentiles, been preserved in all parts of the earth a dis- tinct people. But the prediction brings into our view the prospect of a better time : " Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled;" which, in plain grammatical construction, implies, that when the times of the Gentiles are ful- filled, Jerusalem shall no longer be trodden down. Our Lord is referring to the latter part of Daniel's prophecy of the seventy weeks : " The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with a flood ; and — he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that deter- mined shall be poured upon the desolate ;" or, as I am assured by the best authority, it may be rendered, " upon the desolator."t Now this consummation, what the Septuagint calls ^ avyjtsxita tov xat^ov.is to be learned from other parts of the book of Daniel, in which there is a most circumstantial prophecy of the fate of the great empires of the world, and amongst the rest of the empire of the Ro- mans, who were the desolators of Judea.t A great part of that prophecy has been fulfilled. Learned men have traced so striking a coincidence between the words of Daniol and the history of the world, as is sufficient to impress every candid mind with the divine inspira- tion of this prophet, highly favoured of the Lord, and to beget a full conviction, that every word which he has spoken will iii due time be accomplished. When that will be, or how it will be, we know not. But as the events that have already happened have reflected the clearest light upon former parts of the prophecy, we may rest assured that the end, when it arrives, will explain those parts which are still dark, and that there are methods in reserve, by which the times of the » Deut xiviii. 37. 46. f Dan. is. 26, 27. ^ Dan. ii. and vii. 120 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. Gentiles, that which is determined upon the desolator, all the purposes of God's providence respecting the kingdoms which have arisen out of the Roman empire, shall be fulfilled. It is perfectly agreeable to our Lord's words, to consider the return of the Jews to their own land as connected with this end, the fulfilment of the timxs of the Gentiles : and when we take into our view other parts of scripture, hardly any doubt is left in our minds that this was his meaning. Moses, when he threatens the Jews with dispersion, gives notice, that if, in their captivity, they returned to the Lord, he would gather them from the nations to which he had scattered them : " And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God."* You find this hope expressed by David, by Solomon, by Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Accordingly the two tribes who remembered the God of their fathers, in fulfilment of this promise, as Nehemiah interprets their deliverance, were gathered from their captivity. After their return, the same threatenings of dispersion were denounced against them if they dis- obeyed, and the same promises of being brought back if they repented. Zechariah, who prophesied after the return, says, " I will gather all nations against Jerusalem, and the city shall be taken." But he says also, the day is coming when " I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication."! And this is agreeable to the words of more ancient prophets ; for God says by Jeremiah, " Though I make a full end of all the nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee ;"t and by Amos, " I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled out of the land which I have given them."§ These prophecies, and many others of the same import, open to our view a time when the Jews are to be brought back from captivity. Their return from Babylon, which was a fulfilment of their own prophecies, is a pledge that the greater promise of an ever- lasting settlement in their own land shall be fulfilled also. Their being to this day a distinct people, separate from all others, renders the fulfilment of the prophecy possible, and seems intended as a standing miracle to keep alive in the world the faith of this event. Our Lord, at the very time when he foretells the destruction of the holy city, and the second long captivity of the Jews, intimates, by his mode of expression, that it was not to be perpetual ; and his apostle Paul, to whom Jesus, after his ascension, revealed the whole counsel of God, delights to dwell upon this thought — " I would not, brethren," he says to the Romans, " that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, that blindness in part has happened to Israel, till the fulness of the Gentiles be come in ; and so all Israel shall be saved." || What a glorious view is here presented of the universal kingdom of the Messiah, which is at length to comprehend even the children of those who slew him ! What a consistency and grandeur in the conduct of divine Providence with regard to the Jews, that people * Levit. xxvi. 44. | Zech. xiv. 2 : xii. 9, 10. + Jer. xxx. 11. § Amos ix. 1 5, \\ Rom. xi. 25. PREBICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. 121 whom God formed for himself to show forth his praise ! Raised up at first as a Hglit in a dark place — retaining the knowledge and worship of tlie true God amidst the idolatry of the nations — keeping in their oracles the hope of the Saviour of mankind — carrying by their dispersions these oracles, this knowledge and hope, through the whole earth, and thus rendering the INIessiah the desire of all nations — ex- hibiting in their singular misfortunes the holiness and the power of their God — a monument to the world in their present state, that Jesus is able to take vengeance of his enemies — and yet preserved, even in the midst of that punishment which they endure for obstinacy and infidelity, to receive Christ as a nation, and thus to be the future in- struments of the conversion of the whole world ! When this people, by the out-stretched arm of the Almighty, shall be brought back in his time from the lands where they now sojourn, to that land which, iu the beginning, he chose for them, and Jerusalem, which is now trodden down of the Gentiles, shall be delivered to the Jews; when every prophecy in their books shall be found to conspire most exactly with the words spoken by Christ and his apostles, and all shall receive a striking accomplishment in events most interesting to the whole universe — what eye will be so sealed as to exclude this light, what mind so hardened as not to yield to a conviction which the infinite know-' ledge and power of God will then appear to have united in producing ! Every charge of partiality in the Lord of nature, which the superficial infidel is hasty to bring forward, shall then be swallowed up in the full exposition of that great scheme which is now carrying forward for the final salvation of all the children of God, and every tongue will join in that expression of exalted devotion with which the Apostle Paul shuts up this subject — " 0 the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God, how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out ! For who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his counsellor?"* 8. I mentioned, as the last subject of our Lord's prophecies, the final discrimination of the righteous and the wicked at the day of judgment. This great event is foretold under similitudes, in plain words, without hesitation, with solemnity, with minuteness. The veil is in some measure removed, and we, whose views are generally confined to the events of the little spot which we inhabit, are enabled by the great Prophet to look forward to the end of the world. He has, indeed, hidden the time from our eyes, but he Iws minutely des- cribed every other circumstance. The clearness of his predictions upon such a subject distinguishes him from every other teacher who had appeared before his time, and atibrds a presumption of his divine character. But this is not the place for enlarging upon these predic- tions, and I mention them at present only to state the connection be- tween them and the prophecy which we have been considering. The darkening of the sun, and moon, and stars — the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven — his sending forth his angels with a trumpet, and gathering his elect from the four winds ; all these circumstances bring to our minds a day more awful and important than the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, or any of its inmiediate consequences. And • Rom. xi. 33, 34. 13 T 122 PREDICTIONS DELIVERED BY JESUS. although it is possible, and agreeable to the analogy of Scripture lan- guage, to find a meaning for the various expressions here used, in the dissolution of the Jewish state, in the general publication of the gospel after that event, and the great accession of converts which it contri- buted to bring to Christianity — yet we know that these are the very ex- pressions by which'our Lord and his apostles have described that day, when all who have lived upon the face of the earth shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Several commentators have been of opinion that there is here, in addition to the prophecy of the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, a direct prophecy of the day of judgment. But the limitation of the time of the fulfilment to the existence of the generation then alive, is an unanswerable objection to this opinion ; and, therefore, I consider the latter part of this prediction as a specimen given by our Lord of a prophecy with a double sense. We found that, in the Old Testament, the language of the prophet is often so contrived as to apply at once to two events, the one near and local, the other remote and universal. Thus David, in describing his own sufferings, introduces expressions which are a literal description of the sufferings of the Messiah, and are applied as such by the Evange- lists ; and the words in which he paints the peaceful reign of Solo- mon, received a literal accomplishment in the kingdom of the Prince of Peace. So here the Messiah, who often, in other respects, copies the manner, and refers to the words of ancient prophets, while he is immediately foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem, looks for- ward to the day of judgment, and expresses himself in a language which, although, by the established practice of the prophets, it is applicable in a figurative sense to the fall of a city and the dissolution of a state, yet in its true, literal, precise meaning, applies to that day in which all cities and states are equally interested. While the ful- filment then of the direct sense of this prophecy is a standing proof of the divine knowledge of Jesus, it is also a pledge, that the secondary sense shall in due time be accomplished ; and thus the exhortation with which our Lord concludes this prophecy, and which is manifestly expressed in such a manner, as shows that it was intended for his disciples in every age, is enforced upon us as well as upon those that heard him. The Christians were delivered from the destruction in which their countrymen were involved, by following the directions of Jesus; and upon our watchfulness and obedience to him depend our comfort, our improvement, and the salvation of our souls, in the great day of the Lord. Josephus, Hurd, and Commentarres on the 24th chapter of Matthew, in the works of Til- lotson, Jortin, Newton, Newcome, dec. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 123 CHAPTER VIII. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. Many of the principal facts in the Christian rehgion may be intro- duced as instances of the fulfilment of the prophecies of Jesus, and as thus serving to illustrate the abundant measure in which the spirit of prophecy" was given to that Great Prophet who had been an- nounced from the beginning of the world. But two of these facts deserve a more particular consideration in a view of the evidences of Christianity, because, independently of their having been foretold,^ they bring a very strong confirmation to the high claim advanced in the Scriptures. The two facts which I mean are, the resurrection of Jesus, and the propagation of Christianity. The first of these facts is the resurrection of Jesus. Had he never returned from the grave, his enemies would have considered his death as the completion of their triumph : and those who had admired his character, and had been convinced by his works that he was a teacher sent from God, must have considered his blood as only adding to the sum of all the righteous blood that had been shed upon the earth. His friends might have made a feeble attempt to transmit, with dis- tuiguished honour to posterity, the name of Jesus of Nazareth as a prophet mighty in word and in deed. Yet even they would have been stumbled when they recollected his pretensions and his prophe- cies. He had claimed a character and an authority very inconsistent with the notion of his being a victim to the malice of men ; and he had foretold that after being three days, that is, according to the Jew- ish phraseology, a part of three days in the grave, he would rise from the dead on the third day : resting the truth of his claim upon this fact as the sign that was to be given. The resurrection of Jesus, then, is not merely an important, it is an essential fact in the history of Christianity, If the author of this religion did not return from the grave, he is, according to his own confession, an impostor : if he did, all who are satisfied with the evidence of this singular fact, must ac- knowledge, from the nature of the case, that he was the Son of God with power, by his resurrection from the dead. It behoves you to examine with particular care the kind of evi- dence upon which the wisdom of God has chosen to rest a fact so essential. To the apostles, who were with Jesus when he was ap- prehended, who knew certainly that he was crucified, one of whom saw him on the cross, and all of whom were permitted to converse with him after he was risen, his resurrection was as much an object of sense, at least it was an inference as clearly deducible from what 124 RESURRECTION OP CHRIST. they did see, as if they had been present when the angel rolled the stone from the door of the sepulchre, and when Jesus came forth in the same manner as Lazarus had done a little before at his command. But this evidence of sense could not extend beyond the forty days durhig which Jesus remained upon earth. And the first thing that meets you, in an inquiry into the truth of the resurrection, is the number of persons to whom this evidence of sense was vouchsafed. The time is limited. But tliere is no necessary limitation of the num- ber that might have seen Jesus during that time, and, as the faith of future ages must in a great measure rest upon their testimony, it is natural to consider whether there be any thing in the particular num- ber to whom this evidence of sense was confined, that serves to ren- der the fact incredible. Tiie number is much greater than will appear at first sight to a careless reader of the gospels. The soldiers, the women, and the dis- ciples only are mentioned there. But you will find it said, that Jesus went before his disciples into Galilee, where he had appointed them to meet liim; and one of the appearances narrated by John is said to have been at the sea of Tiberias, which lay in Galilee. Now Galilee was the country where our Lord had spent the greatest part of his life, where his person was perfectly well known, where his mother's relations and the families of the apostles resided. His going to Galilee, therefore, after his resurrection, was giving to a number of persons deeply interested in the fact, an opportunity of being con- vinced by their own senses that the Lord was risen indeed, and thus crowned those evidences of his divine mission which they had derived from their former acquaintance with him. Accordingly, Paul says, that our Lord " was seen of above five hundred brethren at once," which must have happened in Galilee, for the number of disciples in Jeru- salem after the ascension was but " an hundred and twenty." The testimony of this multitude of witnesses in Galilee was sufficient to diliuse through their neighbours and contemporaries a conviction of the fact which they saw. But, it has been asked, Why did Jesus retire to a remote province, and show himself at Jerusalem only to a few witnesses? Why did he not appear openly in the temple, in the synagogue, in the streets pf the holy city, as he was accustomed to do before his death, and overpower the incredulity of the Jews by an ocular demonstration of his divine power ? It is admitted that he did not show himself to all the people. But the objection arising from this supposed deficiency in the evidence, has been completely answered by some of the best commentators upon the New Testament, and by writers in the deist- ical controversy. The heads of the answers are these. The Jewish nation, who had resisted all the evidences of our I^ord's divine mis- sion which were exhibited before their eyes during his ministry, were not entitled to expect that any further means should be employed by heaven for their conviction. The probability is, that the same nar- row views and evil passions which had produced their unbelief while he lived, would have rendered his appearance in their city after his death ineffectual. Our Lord, who foresaw this inefficacy, seems to suggest it as the reason of his conduct in this matter, when he con- cludes one of his parables with saying, " If they hear not Moses and RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 125 the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." After our Lord spake these words, the experiment was made in the case of Lazarus. Many of the neighbonrs of Mary might know certainly that her brother had been raised by the power of Jesus. Yet some of them who liad seen all things that were done, went and told the Pharisees; and the Pharisees, upon the re- port of this miracle, took counsel to put Jesus to death. It was not meet that his own resurrection should give occasion to similar plots again to take away his life. To all this it is to be added in the last place, that, whatever reception Jesus had met with in Jerusalem, the evidence for Christianity might have been injured by his appearing there after his resurrection. Had the Jews continued to reject and persecute him, the united testimony of the nation against the resur- rection might have been represented as sufficient to outweigh the positive testimony of the apostles. Had they received him as their Messiah after he was risen, the Christian religion might have been represented as a state-trick devised by able men for the glory of the nation, which met with opposition at first, but to the faith of which, a well-concerted story of the death and resurrection of its author did at last subdue the minds of the people. From this specimen of the answers which may be made to the objection, it appears that God tries the honesty of our hearts by the methods which he employs to enlighten our reason, that the evidence of religion was not intended to overpower those whose minds are perverted, but to satisfy those who love the truth, and that, in examining any branch of that evi- dence, our business is not to in(]uire what God might have done, but to consider what he has done, and to rest on those facts which appear to our understanding to be sufficiently proven, although our imagina- tion may figure other proofs by which they are not supported. Having seen that the o])jection suggested by the limitation of the number of those who saw Jesus after his resurrection, may easily be answered, I proceed to state the different kinds of evidence which we, in these later ages, have for the truth of this fact. They are three. The traditionary evidence arising from the universal diffusion of the belief of this fact through the Christian world — the clear testimony of the apostles recorded in their writings — and the extraordinary powers conferred upon the apostles. The lowest de2:ree of evidence which we enjoy for the resurrection of Jesus, is that kind of traditionary evidence which arises from the universal diff"usion of the belief of this fact through the Christian world. It appears from the earliest Christian writers, that it was the general faith of all who named the name of Christ, that he had risen from the dead. We are told that the first Christians, in that exulta- tion of mind of which our familiarity with the great truths of religion makes it difficult for us to form a just conception, \vere accustomed to salute one another when they met with this expression, ^^tarog aviarr;: and the first day of the week, which, from the beginning of the Chris- tian church was called Kvgtaao? f;ix(^a, and in all parts of the Christian world has been observed as the day upon which the followers of Jesns assemble for the exercises of devotion, is a standing imequivocal memorial of the truth of the fact which upon that day especially is remembered. It is impossible to conceive how so extraordinary a 13* 126 RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. fact should have been so universally propagated, if it had not been founded in the certain uncontradicted knowledge of those who lived near the time. But, strong as this presumption may justly be held, the faith of future ages in so essential a fact required a more deter- minate support. And this is found in The clear precise testimony of the apostles, those witnesses chosen before of God, who did eat and drink with Jesus after he rose from the dead ; a testimony transmitted to us in the authentic genuine re- cord of discourses that were delivered before his murderers in the city where he sutfered, six weeks after he rose ; and of other dis- courses, and histories, and epistles, in which eye-witnesses declare what they had seen, and heard, and handled of the word of life. To this office Jesus separated the apostles, when he called them, as soon as he began to teach, to be always with him ; and when he said to them a little before his death, " Ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning ;" and a little before his ascension, " Ye shall be witnesses unto me to the uttermost parts of the earth." The apostles had this apprehension of the nature of their office ; for when the place of Judas was to be supplied, Peter says to the disciples, " Of these men that have companied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, must one be or- dained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." And to Paul, who was an apostle " born out of due time," Jesus appeared from heaven, that he might also be a witness of the things which he had seen. You may mark here an uniformity in the evidence of Christianity. The same persons, who are to us the witnesses of the signs which Jesus did in the presence of his disciples, are witnesses also of his having risen from the dead. In both cases they do not declare opinions upon doubtful points, but they attest palpable facts, level to the ap- prehension of the plainest understanding ; and their clear unambigu- ous testimony to the miracles and the resurrection of Jesus, in which they agreed with themselves and with one another till the end, is written in the same books, that we may believe that he is the Christ, the Son of God. We are thus led back to those circumstances which were formerly stated as giving credibility in our days to the miracles of Jesus ; such as the character of the apostles, the scene of danger and suffering in which their testimony was given, the fortitude with which they ad- hered to it, and that simplicity, that air of truth, which pervades the evangelical history, and which falsehood cannot uniformly preserve. All these circumstances are common to the record of the miracles and to the record of the resurrection. But there are some internal marks of truth in the history of the resurrection, which are peculiarly fitted to impress conviction upon all who are capable of apprehending them. I shall mention the three following. The history of the resurrection, published during the life of the witnesses of that event, relates the consternation which it excited amongst the enemies of Jesus, the awk- ward attempts which they made to affix the charge of imposture upon the disciples, and the currency of that report among the Jews at the time of the publication of the history. Again, the historians exhibit the prejudices of the apostles, their slowness of heart to be- R.ESURBECTION OF CHRIST. - 127 lieve, the natural manner in which their doubts were overcome, and the combination of circumstances by whicii a firm beUcf of the resur- rection was established in the minds of the witnesses, and a founda- tion was laid for the faith of succeeding ages. There are, lastly, that apparent imperfection and inaccuracy in the several accounts of this transaction, and those seeming contradictions, which render it impos- sible for any person to beUeve that there was a collusion amongst the evangelists in framing their story, and which yet are of such a kind, that the ingenuity of learned men, by attending to minute and delicate circumstances which escape ordinary observers, has formed out of the four narrations a consistent, probable account of the whole transac- tion. It is not possible for me to enlarge upon these points. But they are so essential to this most interesting article of our faith, tliat they deserve your closest study. And for that purpose I recommend to you the four following books, which every student of divinity ought to read. The first is Ditton on the Resurrection. One part of this book is a general view of the nature of moral evidence, and of the obligation which lies upon every reasonable being to assent to certain degrees of moral evidence ; the other part is an application of this general view to the testimony upon which the resurrection of Christ is received ; and is calculated to show that this testimony has all the qualifications of an evidence obligatory to the human understanding. The second book is known by the name of the Trial of the Witnesses. There are a judge, a jury, and pleaders upon both sides of the ques- tion. The arguments are summed up by the judge, and the jur}?" are unanimous in their verdict that the apostles were not guilty of bear- ing false witness in their testimony of the resurrection. The form of the book, as well as the excellence of the matter, has rendered it popular; and it will be particularly useful to you by making you acquainted with the objections and the heads of the answers. The third is, Gilbert West's Observation upon the History of the Resur- rection of Jesus Christ, which you will find both as a separate book and also inserted in Watson's Tracts. This masterly writer lays together the several narrations, so as to form a consistent account of the whole transaction. He gives a very full view, first, of the order and the matter of that evidence which was laid before the apostles, and then of the arguments which induce us, in this remote age, to receive that evidence. His book, according to this plan, not only places in the strongest light those internal marks of credibility by which the history of the resurrection is distinguished, but also em- braces most of the arguments for the truth of Christianity. The fourth is Cook's Illustration of the General Evidence of the Resur- rection of Christ, a work which displays much acuteness, and a degree of novelty in the manner of stating that evidence. Even Dr. Priestley,an author whom I frequently mention in the following parts of my course, but whose name I seldom have occasion to quote in support of any doctrine of the Christian religion, and whose creed ;Mr. Gibbon has well called a scanty one, has said in one of his latest publications, "The resurrection of our Saviour, being the most extra- ordinary of all events, the evidence of it is remarkably circumstantial, in cx)nsequence of which, there is not perhaps any fact in all ancient 128 RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. history so perfectly credible, according to the most estabUslied rules of evidence, as it is."* Besides the universal tradition in the Christian church, and the written testimony of the apostles, there is yet a third ground upon which we believe tlie resurrection of Christ. " If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater ;" and that witness was given in the extraordinary powers which were conferred upon the apostles before they began to execute their com- mission, and which continued with them always. I stated these powers formerly as the fnlfilment of prophecy. But they present themselves at this place as the vouchers of the testimony of the apostles; and in this light they are uniformly stated both by our Lord and by the witnesses themselves. He said to them before his death, " But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, he shall testify of me ;" and " he will convince the world of sin, because they believe not on me."t Again, a little before his ascension, he said, " Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, aud ye shall be witnesses to me. "J Peter, in one of his first sermons, speaking of the resurrection aiid exaltation of Jesus, says, "We are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost whom God hath given to them that obey him."§ The word translated comforter, in the first passage that I quoted, is 7ia^a,x%rjtoi, which exactly corresponds in etymology to the Latin word advocatus,(xoxn which comes our word advocate, a person called in to stand by another in a court of justice, to assist him in pleading his cause, and confuting his adversaries. The apostles spake before kings and governors, before the whole world, bearing witness to the resurrection of Clirist. But lest they should be confounded by the subtlety, or overwhelmed by the power of their enemies, here is a divine person promised to confirm what they said, and to join with them in convincing the world of their sin in rejecting Jesus, and of his righteousness, that although he had been condemned as a male- flictor, he was accounted righteous in the sight of God. His own works were the evidence, to which he always appealed in his lifetime, thit God was with him; and when he left the earth, the works wiiich he enabled his servants to perform, t!ie same in kind with liis own, were tlie evidence that he had returned to his Father. " There- fore," says Peter on the day of Pentecost, "being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear,"|| Here is another instance of that uniformity which we have often occasion to mark in the evidence of Christianity; the same divine attestation of the servants of Jesus as of himself; the same proof of his resurrection from the dead, as of the high claim which he advanced when he was alive. " The works which I do," he said, "bear wit- ness that the Father hath sent me ; and the works which I do, shall ye my apostles do also, because I go to my Father." We are thus led back to the amount of the argument from miracles, in oiJer to perceive the nature of that confirmation which this testunony of the • Hist, of Early Opinions, iv. 19. f John xv. 26 ; xvi. 8, 9. % Acts i. 8. § Acts V. 32. ] Acts ii. 33. UESURUECTION OF CHRIST. 129 Spirit gives to the testimony of the apostles. If there be an almighty Ruler of the universe, who has estabhshed what we call the laws of nature, and who can suspend them at iiis pleasure; and if this al- mighty Ruler be a God of truth, who takes an interest in the happi- ness of his reasonable offspring, it is impossible tiiat the apostles of Jesus could be invested with powers, the exertion of which was fitted to convince evc.y candid observer of the truth of an imposture; and, therefore, since signs and wonders far beyond the measure of human power are ascribed to the apostles in authentic histories published at the time, in epistles addressed by themselves to the witnesses of those signs, and in the writings of authors nearly contemporary ; since no attempt was made to disprove the facts at the time when the impos- ture inight have been easily exposed, and since the signs were ex- pressly wrought in confirmation of this assertion of the apostles, that their Master was risen from the dead, we are constrained by the strongest moral evidence to believe that that assertion was true. It is impossible for words to make this argument plainer. But there are some particulars which may illustrate the economy of the divine dispensation in conferring these extraordinary powers, and the connection which they have with the other branches of the evidence for Christianity. The day upon which our Lord rose was the day after that Sabbath which was tlie passover, i. e. it was the first day of the week, the Jewish Sabbath being the seventh ; and it was called in the Levitical law, the wave-offering. Pentecost was the Titfttixoarri r;fxi^a, the 50th day from the wave-offering. It was therefore also the first day of the week, and it was a day upon which all the males of Judea were supposed to be present before the Lord in Jerusalem. Our Lord re- mained forty days upon earth after his resurrection, and he probably spent the greatest part of that time in Galilee. But he was in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem upon the fortieth day, for he ascended from Mount Olivet.* The apostles, who probably would feel it to be their duty as Jews to be present at the approaching festival, were commanded by their Master not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the promise of the Father : for, said he, " Ye shall be bap- tized with the Holy Ghost not many days lieuce." Accordingly the eleven returned from the mount, where they had witnessed the ascension, to Jerusalem, and continued quietly with the disciples in prayer and supplication. We have reason to think that they did not appear in public ; and we do not read of any other trans- action but filling up the Apostolical College, till the day of Pentecost, the tenth day after the ascension, when, being "all with one accord in one place, they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." The gift of tongues was the first that was exercised, because it was suited to the occasion. Devout Jews and proselytes were assembled, from re- spect to the festival, out of all countries. To every one in his own tongue, the apostles, inspired with fortitude, another gift of the Spirit, spoke the wonderful works of God. And Peter explained the ap- pearance which excited their wonder, to be the attestation which, in fulfilment of their own prophecies, God was now bearing to the re- • Luke xxiv. ."JO; Acts i. 12. U 130 RESURRECTION OP CHRIST. surrection of the Messiah, whom, after all the works that he had done in the midst of them, their rulers had crucified, but whom God had exahed. You can thus trace, in the lime of conferring these powers, the wise adjustment of means to an end. You see the silence and quietness, which had been maintained after the death of Christ, abundantly compensated by the public manner in which the gospel is first preached. The apostles are directed to submit their claim to the examination of the greatest multitude that could be assembled at Jerusalem; and the report, which this multitude would carry to their own countries of so extraordinary an appearance, was employed as an instrument of preparing many different parts of the world for the preaching of the apostles, who were soon to visit them. The powers themselves are delineated in the Acts and in the Epistles. You read of the word of wisdom, i. e. a clear comprehensive view of the Chris- tian scheme — the word of knowledge, probably the faculty of tracing the connection between the Jewish and Christian dispensation — prophecy, either the applying of the prophecies in the Old Testa- ment, or the foretelling future events — healing — the gift of tongues — the gift of interpreting tongues — and the gift of discerning spirits, that is, perceiving the true character of men under the disguise which they assumed, so as to be able to detect impostors.* There is a variety in these gifts corresponding to all the possible occa- sions of the teachers of this new religion. Some of them, being external and visible, were the signs and pledges of those whicii, although invisible, were not less necessary. Some of them were dis- seminated through the Christian church, and the gifts of healing and of tongues were often conferred by the hands of the apostles upon believers. This abundance of miraculous gifts was proper at that time, to demonstrate to the world the fulness of those treasures which were dispensed by the Lord Jesus, the dignity with which lie had in- vested his apostles, and the obligation which lay upon all Christians to receive his word at their mouth. It was proper to rouse the atten- tion of the world to a new religion, to overcome those considerations of prudence which made them unwilling to forsake the religion of their fathers, and to inspire them with steadfastness in the faith. It was proper also to remove the prejudices which the Jews entertained against the heathen, and to satisfy those who boasted of the privi- leges of the law, that God had received the Gentiles. Cornelius and his kinsmen and his friends were the first uncircumcised persons to whom the gospel was preached. They of the circumcision who believed were astonished when they saw the gift of the Holy Ghost poured out upon them, and heard them speak with tongues. Peter considered this as his warrant to baptize them : and when he reported it after- wards to the apostles and brethren at Jerusalem, they no longer blamed what he had done, but "held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life."' This abundance of miraculous gifts, which so many ''easons rendered proper at the first appearance of Christianity, was gradually withdrawn as the occasions ceased. We have no reason to think » 1 Cor. xii. 8—10. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 131 that any but the apostles had the power of conferring such gifts upon others. We are not indeed warranted to say that miraculous gifts were never visible in any who had not received them from the hands of the apostles. But we know that in the succeeding generations they became more rare. And when we were speaking of this sub- ject formerly, we found writers in the third, and beginning of the fourth century, acknowledging that only some vestiges of such gifts remained in their days. If you lay together the several particulars which have been men- tioned respecting the economy of these miraculous gifts, it will appear that as, from their nature, they were the unquenchable witnesses of the Spirit, confirming the testimony which the apostles bore to the resur- rection of their Master ; so, in the manner of their being conferred, every wise observer may trace the finger of God. There is none of that waste which betrays ostentation, none of that scantiness or delay which implies a defect of power, no circumstance unworthy of the divine author of them ; but the wisdom and power of God are united in the cause of the Gospel, and the same fitness and dignity, which distinguished the miracles of Jesus, are transferred to the works which his Spirit enabled his apostles to perform. 132 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANlTr. CHAPTER IX. PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITT. In our Lord's prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, we meet with these words : " This Gospel of the kingdom shall first be preached to all the world for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end come." These words mark the space intervening between the pre- diction and the termination of the Jewish state, that is, a space of less than forty years, as the period within which the Gospel was to be ' preached to all nations. When we attended to the fnlfihnent of this prophecy, we found that the account given in the book of Acts, of the multitude of early converts, of the dispersion of the Christians, and of the success of Paul's labours, is confirmed by the most unexcep- tionable testimony. We learn from Tacitus, that in the year of our Lord 63, thirty years after his death, there was an immense multitude of Christians in Rome. From the capital of the world, the communi- cation was easy through all the parts of the Roman empire ; and no country then discovered was too distant to hear the gospel. Accord- ingly it is generally agreed, that before the destruction of Jernsalem, Scythia on the north, India on the east, Gaul and Egypt on the west, and Ethiopia on the south, had received the doctrine of Christ. And Britain, wliich was then regarded as the extremity of the earth, being frequently visited during that period by Roman emperors or their generals, there is no improbability in what is affirmed by Christian historians, that the gospel was preached in the capital of this island thirty years after the death of our Saviour. The last fact which Scripture contains respecting the propagation of Christianity, is found in the book of Revelation. It appears from the epistles wliich John was commanded to Vv'-rite to the ministers of the churches of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea, that there were, during the life of that apostle, seven regular Chris- tian churches in Asia Minor. We may consider the facts hitherto mentioned as the fulfilment of that prophecy which I quoted. As to the progress of our religion, subsequent to the period marked in the prophecy, we derive no light from the books of the New Testa- ment, because there is none of them which we certainly know to be of a later date than the destruction of Jerusalem. But there are other authentic monuments from which I shall state you the fact ; and then I shall lead you to consider the force of the argument for the truth of Christianity, which has been 2:rounded upon that fact. The younger Pliny, proconsul of Bifhynia, writes in the end of the first century to the emperor Trajan, asking directions as to his conduct PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITy. 133 with regard to the Christians. The letter of Pliny, the 97th of the 10th book, ought to be familar to every student in divinity. He repre- sents that many of every age and rank were called to account for bearing the Christian name ; that the contagion of that superstition had spread not only through the cities, but through the villages and. fields ; that tlie temples had been deserted, and the usual sacrifices neglected. There are extant two apologies for Christianity, written by Justin Martyr, about the middle of the second century, and one by TertuUian before the end of it. These apologies, which were public papers addressed to the emperor and the Roman magistrates, mention with triumph the multitude of Christians. And there is a work of Justin Martyr, entitled a dialogue with Trypho the Jew, pub- lished about the year 146, in which he thus speaks. "There is no nation, whether of Barbarians or Greeks, whether they live in wag- gons or tents, amongst whom prayers are not made to the Father and Creator of all, through the name of the crucified Jesus." Both Chris- tian and heathen writers attest the general diffusion of Christianity through the empire during the third century ; and in the beginning of the fourth, Constantine, the emperor of Rome, declared himself a Christian, If we consider the emperor as acting from conviction, Christianity has reason to boast of the illustrious convert. If we consider him as acting from policy, his finding it necessary to pay such a compliment to the inclinations of the Christians is the strongest testimony of their numbers. After Christianity became, by the declaration of Constantine, the established religion of the em- pire, it was diffused, under that character, through all the provinces. It was embraced by the barbarous nations who invaded different parts of the empire, and it received the sanction of their authority in the independent kingdoms which they founded. From them it has been handed down to the nations of modern Europe. It is at present professed throughout the most civilized and enlightened part of the world ; and it has been carried in the progress of modern discoveries and conquests to remote quarters of the globe, where the arms of Rome never penetrated. Upon these facts there has been grounded an argument for the truth of our religion. Gamaliel said in the sanhedrim, when the gospel was first preached, " If this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought. But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it."* The counsel has not been overthrown, therefore it is of God. The argument is specious and striking, and, with proper qualifications, it is sound. But much caution is required in stating it. And as I have given you the facts without exaggeration, so it is my duty to suggest the difficulty to which the argument is exposed, and to warn you of the danger of hurting the cause which you mean to serve, by arguing loosely from the success of the gospel. » AcU V. 36, 39. 14 134 PROPAGATION OP CHRISTIANITY. Section I. We are not warranted to consider the success of any system which calls itself a religion, as an infallible proof that it is divine. The prejudices, the ignorance, the vices, and follies of men, a particular conjuncture of circumstances, and the skilful application of human means, may procure a favourable reception for an imposture, and may give the belief of its divinity so firm possession of the minds of men, as to render its reputation permanent. We justly infer from the moral attributes of God that he will not invest a false prophet with extraordinary powers. But we are not warranted to infer that he will interpose in a miraculous manner to remove the delusion of those who submit their understandings to be misled by the arts of cunning men. He has given us reason, by the right use of which we may distinguish truth from falsehood. He leaves us to suffer the natural consequences of neglecting to exercise our reason ; and it is presumptuous to say that there can be no fraud in a scheme, because the Almighty, for the wise purposes of his government, or in just judgment upon those who had not the love of the truth, permitted that scheme to be successful. As the reason of the thing suggests that success is not an unequivocal proof of the divine original of any system, so the providence of God has afforded Christians a striking lesson how careful they ought to be in qualifying the argument deduced from the propagation of Chris- tianity. For, in the seventh century of the Christian era, there arose an individual in Arabia, who, although he be regarded by every rational inquirer as an impostor, was able to introduce a religious sys- tem, which in less than a century spread through Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and Persia, which has subsisted in vigour for more than eleven hundred years, and is at this day the established religion of a portion of the world much larger than Christendom. The followers of Ma- homet triumph in the extended dominion of the author of their faith. But a Christian, who understands the method of defending his reli- gion, has no reason to be shaken by the empty boast. For thus stands the argument. When we are able to point out the human causes which have produced any event, the existence of that event is no de- cisive proof of a divine interposition. But when all the means that were employed appear inadequate to the end, we are obliged to have recourse to the finger of God ; and the inference, which arises from our being unable to give any other account of the end, will be drawn without hesitation, if there be positive evidence that, in the accom- plishment of the end, there was an exertion of divine power. When you apply this universal rule in trying the argument which appears at first sight to be equally implied in the success of the two religions, you find the history of the one so clearly discriminated from the history of the other, that the inference, which a proper examina- tion of circumstances enables a Christian to draw from the success of the gospel, does in no degree belong to the disciples of Mahomet. The best guide whom you can follow in making this discrimination is Mr. White, who, availing himself of that acquaintance with east- ern Uterature to which his inclination and his profession had conspired PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 135 to direct him, lias published a vohime of Sermons, entitled, A Com- parative View of Christianity and Mahometanism, in their history, their evidence, and their effects. There is in these sermons much valuable and uncommon information combined with great judgment, and expressed in a nervous and elevated style. They meet many of the objections of modern times, and form one of the most complete and masterly defences of the truth of Christianity. You will learn from him, better than from any other writer, the favourable circum- stances to which Mahomet owed his success. And the short picture, which I am now to give you of these circumstances, is little more than an abridgment of some of Mr. White's sermons. Born in an ignorant uncivilized country, and amidst independent tribes of idolatrous Arabs, when the Roman empire was attacked on every side by barbarians, when the Christian world was torn with dissension about inexplicable points of controversy, when the simpli- city of the gospel was corrupted, and when Christian charity was forgotten in the bitterness of mutual persecution, Mahomet, who pos- sessed strong natural talents, saw the possibility of rising to eminence as the great reformer of religion. Having waited till his own mind was matured by meditation, and till he had established in the minds of his neighbours an opinion of his sanctity, he began at the age of forty to deliver chapters of the Koran. During the long space of twenty-three years, he had an opportunity of trying the sentiments of his countrymen. By successive communications he corrected what had proved disagreeable, and he accommodated his system so as to give the least possible ofience to Jews, or Christians, or idolaters. He admitted the divine mission of Moses and of Jesus. He inculcated the unity of God, which is a fundamental article of the Jewish and Christian religions, and which was not denied by many of the sur- rounding idolaters. From the Old and New Testament he borrowed many sublime descriptions of the Deity, and much excellent morality ; and "all this he mixed with the childish traditions and fables of Ara- bia, with a toleration of many idolatrous rites, and with an indul- gence to the vices of the climate. And thus the Koran is not a new system discovering the invention of its author, but an artful motley mixture, made up of the shreds of different opinions, without order or consistency, full of repethions and absurdities, yet presentmg to every one something agreeable to his prejudices, expressed in the captivating language of the country, and often adorned with the graces of poetry. To his illiterate countrymen such a work appeared marvellous. The artifice and elegance with which its discordant ma- terials were combined so far surpassed their inexperience and rude- ness, that they gave credit to the declaration of Mahomet, who said it was delivered to him by the angel Gabriel. The Koran became the standard of taste and composition to the Arabians ; and the blind admiration of those who knew no rival to its excellence was easily transformed into a belief of its divinity. In the beginning of his scheme, Mahomet met with much opposi- tion, and he was obliged at one time to fly from Mecca to Medina. His reputation had prepared for him a favourable reception in that city. His address, his superior knowledge, and the influence of his connections, soon gathered round him a small party, with which he 136 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. began to make those predatory excursions, which have, in every age, been most agreeable to the character of the Arabs. Mahomet pre- tended, that as all gentle methods of reforming mankind had proved ineffectual, the Almighty had armed him with the power of the sword; and he went forth to compel men to receive the great prophet of hea- ven. His talents as a leader, the success of his first expeditions, and the hope of booty, increased the number of his followers. It was not long before he united into one body the tribes of Arabs who flocked around his standard : and at the time of his death he was meditating distant conquests. The magnificent project which he had conceived and begun was executed with ability and success by the caliphs, to whom he transmitted his temporal and his spiritual power. They led the Arabs to invade the neighbouring provinces, and by their victo- rious arms they founded, upon the religion of the Koran, an empire, which the joint influence of ambition and enthusiasm continued for ages to extend. Mahomet, then, is not to be classed with the teachers of piety and virtue, whose success may be considered as an example of the power of truth over the mind. He ranks with those conquerors whom the spirit of enterprise and a concurrence of circumstances have conducted from a humble station to renown and to empire. He is distinguished from them chiefly by calling in religion to his aid; and his sagacity in employing so useful an auxiliary is made manifest by the progress and the permanence of his scheme. But the means were all human; the only assistance which Mahomet pretended to receive from heaven consisted of the revelation which dictated to him the Koran, and the strength which crowned him with victory. How far a revelation was necessary for the composition of the Koran may be left to the decision of any person of taste and judgment who remembers, when he reads it, that Mahomet was in possession of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. How far the strength of heaven was necessary to give victory to Mahomet may be left to the judgment of any one who compares the spirit of the Arabs, influenced and directed by the character and the views of their leader, with the wretched condition of those whom they conquered. Yet these were the only pretences to a divine mission which Mahomet made. He declared that he had no commission to work miracles ; and he appealed to no other pro- phecies than those which are contained in our Scriptures. And thus, as the introduction of his scheme did not imply the exer- cise of supernatural powers, as no positive unequivocal evidence of his possessing such powers was ever adduced, so his success may be fully accounted for by human means. The more that an intelligent reader is conversant with the Koran, he discerns the more clearly the internal marks of imposture ; and the more that he is conversant with the manners of the times in which Mahomet lived, and with the his- tory of the progress of his empire, he is the less surprised at the pro- pagation and the continuance of that imposture. When you turn from this picture to view the history of the progress of Christianity, the striking contrast will appear to you to warrant the conclusion which the followers of Jesus are accustomed to draw from the success of his religion. In a province of the Roman empire, after it had reached the sum- PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 137 mit of its glory, and in the Augustan age, the most enlightened period of Roman iiistory, there appeared a Teacher delivering openly, in the temple and the synagogue, tlie purest morality, the most spiritual institutions of worship, and the most exalted theology, not in a sys- tematical form, but in occasional discourses, and in the simplest lan- guage. He committed his instructions, not to writing, but to a few ilhterate men who had been his companions; and the number of his disciples after he was crucified by the voice of his countrymen, did not exceed one hundred and twenty. His apostles, in teachhig what they received from their Master, had to encounter an opposition which, in all human rules of judging, was sufficient to create an insurmountable ob- stacle to the progress of their doctrine. They had to combat the vices of an age which, according to all the pictures that have been drawn of it, appears to have exceeded the usual measure of corruption. Yet they did not accommodate their precepts to the manners of the world, but denounced the wrath of God against all unrighteousness of men, against practices which were nearly universal, and the indulgence of passions which were esteemed innocent or laudable. They had to com- bat what is generally more obstinate than vice, the religious spirit of the times ; for they commanded men " to turn from idols to serve the living God." That reverence for public institutions which even an unbeliever may feel, that attachment to received opinions, that fond- ness for ancient practices, and those prejudices of education which always animate narrow minds, united with the influence of the priests, and of all the artists who lived by administering to the mag- nificence of the temples, against the teachers of this new doctrine. The zeal of the worshippers, revived by the return of those festivals at which the Christians refused to partake, often broke forth with fury. The Christians were considered as atheists ; and it was thought that the wrath of the gods could not be better appeased than by pour- ing every indignity and abuse upon men who presumed to despise their worship. The wise men in that enlightened age, who rose above the superstition of their countrymen, although they joined with the Christians in thinking contemptuously of the gods, were not disposed to give any countenance to the teachers of this new system. They despised the simplicity of its form, so diflerent from the subtleties of the schools. When at any time they condescended to listen to its doctrines, they found some of them inconsistent with tlieir received opinions, and mortifying to the pride of reason. They confounded with the popular superstitions a doctrine which professed to enlighten the great body of the people, and they condemned the prohibition of idolatry ; for it \v^as their principle, that philosophers might dispute and doubt concerning religion as they pleased, but that it was their duty, as good citizens, to conform to the established modes of wor- ship. Upon these grounds, Christianity was so far from being favourably received by the heathen philosophers, that it was early opposed and ridiculed by them ; and they continued to write against it after the empire had become Christian. The unbelieving Jews were the bitterest enemies of the Christian faith. They beheld with peculiar indignation the progress of a doc- trine, which not only invaded the prerogative of the law of Moses, by claiming to be a divine revelation, but even professed to supersede 14* X 138 , PROPAGATION OF CHKISTIANITY. that law, to abolish the distinctions which it had established, and to enlighten those whom it left in darkness. National pride, and the bigotry of the Jewish spirit, were alarmed. The rulers, who had crucified the Lord Jesus, continued to employ all the power left them by the Romans in persecuting his servants ; and the sufferings of the first Christians arose from the envy, the jealousy, and a fear of a state, which the prophecies of their Master had devoted to destruction. It was not long before the Christians felt the indignation of the Roman emperors and magistrates. The Roman law guarded the es- tablished religion against the introduction of any new modes of wor- ship which had not received the sanction of public authority : and it was a principle of Roman policy to repress private meetings, as the nurseries of sedition. " Ab nullo genere," says M. Porcius Cato, in a speech preserved by Livy, " non asque summum periculum est, si coBtus, et concilia, et secretas consultationes esse sinas."* Upon this principle, the Christians, who separated themselves from the estab- lished worship, and held secret assemblies for the observance of their own rites, were considered as rebellious subjects ; and when they multiplied in the empire, it was judged necessary to restrain them. Pliny, in the letter to which I referred, says to Trajan, " Secundum tua mandata ttM^i^ai esse vetuerara ;" and Trajan, in his answer, re- quires that every person who was accused of being a Christian should vindicate himself from the charge, by offering sacrifice to the gods. " Conquirendi non sunt; si deferentur et arguentur puniendi sunt ; ita tamen ut qui negaverit se Christianura esse, idque re ipsa mani- festum fecerit, id est, supplicando deis nostris, quamvis suspectus in prasteritum fuerit, veniam ex poinitentia impetret." It was not always from the profligacy or cruelty of the emperors that the sufferings of the Christians flowed. Some of the best princes who ever filled the Roman throne, men who were an ornament to human nature, and whose administration was a blessing to their sub- jects, felt themselves bound, by respect for the established religion, and care of the public peace, to execute the laws against this new society, the principles of whose union appeared formidable, because they were not understood. Accordingly, ecclesiastical historians have numbered ten persecutions before the conversion of Constantino ; and an innumerable company of martyrs are said to have sealed their tes- timony with their blood, and to have exhibited amidst the most cruel sufferings a fortitude, resignation, and forgiveness, which not only de- monstrated their firm conviction of the truths which they attested, but conveyed to every impartial spectator an impression that these men were assisted by a divine power, which raised them above the weakness of humanity. Voltaire, Gibbon, and other enemies of Christianity, aware of the force of that argument which arises from the multitude of the Christian martyrs, and from the spirit with which they endured the severity of their sufferings, have insinuated that there is much exaggeration in the accounts of this matter ; that the generous spirit of Roman policy rendered it impossible that there should be an imperial edict enjoining a general persecution ; that although the people might be incensed against the obstinacy and sul- * Liv. xxxiv. 2. PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 139 lenness of the Christians, the magistrates, in their different provinces, were their protectors ; that there was no wanton barbarity in the manner of their sufferings; and that none lost their Hves, but such as, by provoking a death in which they gloried, put it out of the power of the magistrates to save them. It is natural for a friend to humanity, and an admirer of Roman manners, to wish that this apology were true ; and it is not ur)likely that the vanity of Christian historians, indignation against their perse- cutors, and the habits of rhetorical declamation, have swelled, in their descriptions, the numbers of the martyrs. It is most likely that the mob were more furious than the magistrates; that those who were entrusted with the execution of the Roman laws would observe the spirit of them in the mode of trying persons accused of Christianity ; and that the governors of provinces might, upon several occasions, restrain the eagerness with which the Christians were sought after, and the brutality and iniquity with which they were treated. But, after all these allowances, any person who studies the history of the Christian church will perceive that there is much false colouring in the apology which has been made for the Roman magistrates ; and we can produce incontestible evidence, the concurring testimony of Christian and heathen writers, that, upon the principles which have been explained, Christianity was publicly discouraged in all parts of the Roman empire ; and that, although favourable circumstances pro- cured some intervals of respite, there were many seasons when this religion was persecuted by order of the emperors — when the Chris- tians were liable to imprisonment and confiscation of their estates — and when death, in some of its most terrifying forms, was inflicted upon those, who, being brought before the tribunals, refused to ab- jure the name of Christ. Such was the complicated opposition Avhich the apostles of Jesus had to encounter. Yet the measure of their success was such as I have stated. Without the aid of power, or wealth, or popular pre- judices; without accommodation to reigning vices and opinions; without drawing the sword, or fomenting sedition, or encouraging the admiration of their followers to confer upon them any earthly honours — but by humble, peaceable, laborious teaching, they dilTused through a great part of the Roman empire the knowledge of a new doctrine ; they turned many from the idols which they had v/orshipped, and from the enormities which they had practised, to serve the living God ; and this spiritual system advanced under every discouragement, till the conversion, or the policy, of Constantino rendered it the estab- lished religion of the Roman empire. All speculations concerning the contagion of example, the zeal that is kindled by persecution, the power of vanity, and the love of the marvellous, are visionary, when you apply them to account for the change which Christianity made during the three first centuries. That multitudes in every country, and of every age and rank, should forsake the religion in which they had been eclucated, and embrace one which was much stricter, and which brought no worldly advantage, but exposed thcin to the heaviest afflictions ; that they should be thus converted by the preaching of mean men ; and that their conversion should appear in the reforma- tion of their lives as well as in the alteration of their worship, is a 140 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITT. phenomenon of which we require some cause, whose influence does not depend upon refined speculations, but is real and permanent : and not being able to find any such cause in the human means that were employed, we are led by the principles of our nature to acknow- ledge the interposition of the Almighty. But this is the very conclusion to which we were formerly con- dncted. It is said in their books tliat God bare witness to the apostles by signs, and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Gho:3t. And there is as clear historical evidence as the nature of the case admits of, that this assertion is true. The ciiange, then, which we have been contemplating, is no longer unaccountable. Miracles wrougiit by the first teacliers of Christianity were sufficient to rouse the attention of the world even in the most superstitious age, and the argument employed in them was so plain as to be level to every un- derstanding, and so powerfnl, that we are not surprised at its over- coming, in the breasts of those who beheld them, all considerations of prudence and expediency. The eye-witnesses of the miracles, yielding to the demonstration of the Spirit, gave glory to God by re- ceiving his servants ; and when the signs done by the hands of the apostles were transmitted to succeeding ages, attested by an innume- rable cloud of witnesses, the certain knowledge that they had been wrought produced in the minds of numbers a full conviction that the religion of Jesus was introduced into the world by the mighty power of God. Tiius, then, stands the argument arising from the propagation of Christianity. The human means appear wholly inadequate to the eifect. But there is positive evidence of a divine interposition ; and if that be admitted, the eifect may easily be explained. The two parts of the argument illustrate one another. The miracles, which we receive upon a strong concurring testimony, enable us to assign the cause of the propagation of Christianity; and the knowledge of that propagation, which we derive from history, reflects additional light and credibility upon the miracles. The discrimination ]}etween the success of Mahomet and the establishment of Christianity is so clear and striking, that we may with perfect fairness apply the reasoning of Gamaliel to the latter, although we do not admit that it has any force when applied to the former. These are the principles upon which you may safely argue from the success of the gospel that it is of divine origin. But although the argument, when thus stated, approves itself to every candid mind as sound and conclusive, there are still several difficulties respecting the propagation of Christianity. Section II. I mention, first, an objection, which a celebrated part of the writ- ings of Mr. Gibbon has suggested, to the account given in the pre- ceding Section. The fifteenth chapter in his first volume professes to be a candid, but rational inquiry into the progress and establishment of Christianity. " Our curiosity is naturally prompted to inquire by PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 141 what means the Christian faitli obtained so remarkable a victory over the estabUshed rehgions of the earth. To this inquiry, an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned ; that it was owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruhng Provi- dence of its great Author. But as truth and reason seldom find so fovourable a reception in the world, and as tlie wisdom of Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the human heart and the general circumstances of mankind as instruments to execute its purpose, we may still be permitted, though with becoming submis- sion, to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were the secon- dary causes of the rapid growth of the Christian church," The soundest divine might have used this language. We acknow- ledge that the Providence of God condescends to employ various instruments to execute his purpose ; and therefore, while we aflirm that the manifestation of the power of God was the great mean of overcoming those prejudices, which prevented the easy admission of truth and reason into the minds of the first hearers of the gospel, we admit that there were also means prepared by the providence of God to facilitate the progress of this religion. But it happens that Mr. Gibbon is doing the office of an enemy, while be speaks the language of a friend. His object is to show, that the joint operation of the five secondary causes, which he enumerates, is sufficient to account for the propagation of Christianity; and the influence which the whole chapter tends to convey to the mind of the reader, although it be nowhere expressed, is this, that there is not any occasion for hav- ing recourse, in this matter, to the ruling providence of God, The five secondary causes enumerated by Mr, Gibbon are these, 1. "The inflexible and intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true, from the Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from embracing the law of Moses." 2, " The doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth." 3. " The miraculous powers of the primi- tive church," 4, " The virtues of the primitive Christians." 5. " The iniion and discipHne of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Ro- man empire." Mr. Gibbon's illustration of these five causes is not a logical dis- cussion of their influence upon the propagation of Christianity, such as might have been expected from his manly understanding. But it is filled with digressions, which, although they often detract from the influence of the causes, serve a purpose more interesting to the author tlian the ilhistration of that influence, by presenting a degrading view of the religion which these causes are said to promote. It is filled with indirect sarcastic insinuations, with partial representations of facts and arguments, and with very strained uses of quotations and authorities. I consider the fifteentli chapter of Mr. Gibbon's history as the most uncandid attack which has been made upon Christianity in modern times. The emuient abilities, the brilliant style, and the high reputation of the author, render it particularly dangerous to those whose information is not extensive : and therefore I recommend to you, not to abstain from reading it. Such a reconmiendation would 142 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. imply some distrust of the cause which Mr. Gibbon has attacked, and a compliance with it would be very unbecoming an inquirer after truth. But I recommend to you to read along with this chapter some of the answers that have been made to it. I know no book that has been so completely answered. The author, indeed, continues to disco- ver the same virulence against Christianity in the subsequent volumes of his work, upon subjects of less importance than the causes of its propagation, and where the indecent controversies amongst Christians give him the appearance of a triumph in the eyes of those who con- found true religion with the corruptions of it. But any person who has examined the fifteenth chapter with due care, and with a suffi- cient measure of information, must, I think, entertain such an opinion of the inveteracy of Mr. Gibbon's prejudices against Christianity, and of the arts which those prejudices have made him stoop to employ, as may fortify his mind against any inclination to commit himself to a guide so unsafe in every thing which concerns religion. When you attend to the nature of the five secondary causes, you are at a loss to conceive how they come to be ranked in the place which Mr. Gibbon assigns them. If by the intolerant and inflexible zeal of the first Christians be meant their ardour and activity in promoting a religion which they believed to be divine, we readily admit that the labours of the apostles and their successors were an instrument by which God spread the knowledge of the gos- pel. But this cause is so far from accounting for the conviction which the first teachers themselves had of the facts which they attested, that their ardour and activity is incredible, unless it proceeded from this conviction ; and the kind of inflexibility and intolerance of the idolatry and the vices of the world, which was necessarily connected with their conviction of the great facts of Christianity, was more likely to deter than to invite men to embrace it. If by the doctrine of a future life be meant the hope of life eternal, which is held forth with assurance in the gospel to the penitent, this is so essential a branch of the excellence of the doctrine, that it cannot with any pro- priety, be called a secondary cause ; and those adventitious circum- stances which Mr. Gibbon represents as connected with this hope, he means the speedy dissolution of the world, and the reign of Christ with his saints upon earth for a thousand years, commonly called the Millenium, appear to every rational inquirer to have no foundation in Scripture, and never to have formed any part of the teaching of the apostles. If by the miraculous powers of the primitive church be meant the demonstration of the Spirit, which accompanied the first preaching of the gospel in the signs and wonders done by the hands of the apostles, this is manifestly a part of the ruling providence of its great Master. It is not denied that the miracles, which rest upon unexceptionable historical evidence, were succeeded by many pre- tensions to miraculous powers after this gift of the Spirit was with- drawn. But it is not easy to conceive how these pretensions obtained any credit in the Christian Church, unless it was certainly known that many real miracles had been wrought ; and it is obvious that the multitude of delusions which were practised tended to discredit the gospel in the eye of every rational inquirer, and, instead of promoting the success of the new religion, was most likely to confound it with PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 143 those Pa^an fables which it commanded men to forsake. The virtues of the primitive Christians were exhibited in circumstances so trying that they recommended the new reUgion most powerfully to the world. But these virtues, which were the native expression of faith in the gospel, and the fruit of the Spirit, must be resolved into the excellence of the doctrine. Mr. Gibbon, indeed, has drawn under this head a picture of the manners of the primitive Christians, which holds them up to the ridicule and censure, not to the admiration of the world. The colouring of this picture has been discovered to be, in many places, false and extravagant : and this glaring inconsistency strikes every person who attends to it, that an author who assigns the virtues of the primitive Christians as a cause of the propagation of Christianity, chooses to degrade that religion by such a representation of these virtues, as,if it were true, would satisfy every reader that they had no influence in producing the efl'ect which he ascribes to them. In stating the last cause, there is an obvious inaccuracy, which Mr. Gibbon would not have been guilty of upon another subject. He is professing to account for the rcipid growth of the Christian church. His fiftii cause is the union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent state ; and his accoiuit of the maimer of its formation extends through the three first centuries of the Christian era. It matters not to the subject upon which it is introduced, whether the account be just or false ; for it is manifest that the rapid growth of the Christian church in the first and second centuries cannot be ascribed to the union and discipline of the Christian republic, which was not completed till after the third century. You will perceive by the short specimen which I have given, that the danger of Mr. Gibbon's book does not arise from his having dis- covered five secondary causes of the propagation of Christianity, to which the world had not formerly attended. It arises from the manner in which he has illustrated them : and the only way to obviate the danger is to canvass his illustration very closely. There is very com- plete assistance provided for you in this exercise. Mr. White has touched upon Mr. Gibbon's five causes shortly, but ably, in his Comparative View of Mahometanism and Christianity. Bishop Watson, in his Apology for Christianity, has given, with much animation, and without any personal abuse, a concise clear argument upon every one of the five causes, which appears to me to show in the most satisfactory manner, that they do not answer the purpose for which they are introduced, and that it is still necessary to have re- course to the ruling providence of the great Author of Christianity in order to account for its propagation. After Bishop Watson's Apology was published, an answer was made to this 15fh chapter, by Sir David Dalrymple, Lord Ilailes, entitled, An Inquiry into the secondary causes which Mr. Gibbon assigns for the rapid growth of Christianity. Sir David was peculiarly fitted for such an inquiry. He had an acute distinguishing mind, enriched with a very imcommon measure of theological reading, and capable of the most ixTticnt minute investi- gation. He was a zealous friend of Christianity. And he has applied his talents with great success in hunting out every misrepre- sentation and contradiction into which ]Mr. Gibbon was betrayed by 144 PROPAGATION OP CHRISTIANITY. his fcivourite object. There is not so much general reasoning in the Inquiry as in the Apology. But Lord Hailes has sifted the 1 5th chapter thoroughly. He treats his antagonist with decency, and yet he triumphs over him in so many instances, and brings conviction home to the reader in so pointed a manner, that he is warranted to draw the conclusion which I shall give you in the moderate terms that he has chosen to employ. " Mr. Gibbon's first proposition is, that Christianity became victorious over the established religions of the earth, by its very doctrine, and by the ruling providence of its great Author ; and his last, of a like import, is, that Christianity is the truth. Between his first and his last propositions there are, no doubt, many dissertations, digressions, inferences, and hints, not altogether consistent with his avowed principles. But much allowance ought to be made for that love of novelty which seduces men of genius to think and speak rashly ; and for that easiness of belief, which inclines us to rely on the quotations and commentaries of confident persons, without examining the authors of whom they speak. From a review of all that he has said, it appears that the things which Mr. Gib- bon considered as secondary or human causes, efficaciously promoting the Christian religion, either tended to retard its progress, or were the manifest operations of the wisdom and power of God." Section III. As Mr. Gibbon dwells upon secondary causes, it occurs in this place to mention the rank and character of those who were converted to Christianity in early times. It is obvious to observe, that although the condition and circumstances of the first teachers had been ever so mean, if by any accident their doctrine had been instantly adopted by men of superior knowledge or of commanding influence, there might liave been, in this way, created a secondary cause, sufficient, in some measure, to account for the propagation of Christianity. But the fact long continued to correspond to the description given by the apostle Paul, not many wise, not many mighty, not many noble were called. But God employed the foolish to confound the wise, and those who were despised to confound those who were highly esteemed, that no flesh might glory in his presence, and that the excellency of the power might appear to be of him.* Yet even here a bound was set by the wisdom of God, Had Christianity been embraced in early times only by the ignorant vulgar, it might have been degraded in the eyes of succeeiling ages; and the universal indifference or unbelief of those, whose und.TStandings had received any degree of culture and enlarge- ment, might have conveyed to careless observers an impression that this new religion was an irrational, mean superstition. To obviate this objection, even the Scriptures mention the names of many per- sons of superior rank who embraced Christianity at its first publica- tion ; and we know, that during the two first centuries, men com- pletely versed in all the learning of the times left the schools of the • 1 Cor. i. 26, 27, 28 ; 2. Cor. iv. 7. PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 145 philosophers, and employed their talents and their knowledge in ex- plaining and defending the doctrines of Christ. Qnadratus and Aris- tides were Athenian philosophers, who flourished in the very beginnhig of the second century, and who continued to wear the dress of phi- losophers, at'ter they became Christians. Their apologies for Chris- tianity are quoted by very ancient historians ; but the quotations made from flicm are the only parts of them now extant. We still have several works of Justin Martyr, who lived in the second cen- tury. In his Dialogue with Tripho the Jew, he gives an account of the time and attention which he had bestowed upon the study of Platon- ism, and the admiration in which he once held that doctrine. But now, he says, having been acquainted with the prophets and those men who were the friends of Jesus, I have found that this is the only safe and useful philosophy. And thus I have become a philosopher indeed. "^ravtrv novov tu^ts^coc ^t.^.osci^t.ai' an^aXr] rs xat avfi^o^ov. There was one early convert to Christianity, whose attainments and whose character may well be considered as constituting a most powerful secondary cause in its propagation. I mean the apostle Paul, a learned Pharisee, bred at the feet of Gamaliel, a man of an ardent elevated mind, and of a strong well-cultivated understanding, who laboured more abundantly than all the apostles, with indefatiga- ble zeal, and with peculiar advantages. But it is remarkable that this man, in preaching the Gospel, did not avail himself of all the arts which he had learned to employ. His knowledge of the law was used not to support but to overturn the system in which he had been bred. There is not in his writings the most distant approach to the forms of Grecian or Asiatic eloquence ; and there is a freedom and a severity in his reproofs, very different from the courtly manner which his education might have formed. His conversion is, in itself, an illustrious argument of the truth of Christianity. You will find the force of this argument well stated in a treatise of the first Lord Lyttelton, entitled, Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul ; one of those classical essays which every student of divinity should read. The elegant and amiable writer, whose name is dear to every man of taste and virtue, demonstrates the following points with a beautiful persuasive simplicity. 1. The supposition, neither of enthusiasm nor of imposture, is sufficient to account for the conver- sion of this apostle ; 2. The character of his mind, and the history of his life, conspire in confirming the narration so often repeated in the book of Acts; 3. That narration involves in it the truth of the resur- rection of Jesus, the great fact which the apostles witnessed ; 4. Paul had had no opportunity of holding any previous concert with the other apostles, but was completely separated from them : 5. His situation gave him the most perfect access to know whether there was truth in the report published by them, as witnesses of the resurrec- tion of Jesus ; and therefore his concurrence with the other apostles, in publisliing that report, and i)reacliing the doctrine founded upon it, is an accession of new evidence after the first promulgation of Chris- tianity. The force of this new evidence will always remain with those who acknowledge the books of the New Testament to be authentic. And, for the benefit of the Christians who lived before the books were published, it was M'isely contrived that the new 146 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. evidence should arise out of the history of that man whose labours contributed most largely to the conversion of the world, so that in the very person from whom they received their faith, they had a demon- stration of its being divine. And thus you observe, that while the humble station of the rest of the apostles necessarily leads us to a divine interposition, as the only mean of qualifying such men for being the instructors of the world, the condition and education of the apostle Paul, which fur- nished a secondary cause that was useful in the propagation of Christianity, do, at the same time, render his conversion such an argu- ment for the truth of that religion, as is much more than sufficient to counterbalance all the advantages which it could possibly derive from his knowledge and his talents. All this you will find illustrated in a very full life of St. Paul, which Dr. Macknight has prefixed to his commentary on the epistles. Sectjon IV, I HAVE stated the qualifications which are necessary in order to render the argument arising from the propagation of Christianity sound and conclusive ; I have suggested the manner of obviating the objections contained in Mr. Gibbon's account of the secondary causes which promoted the rapid growth of the Christian church ; and I have marked the argument implied in the conversion of the apostle Paul. All that I have hitherto said respects the means employed in pro- pagating the gospel. But there is another set of objections that will often meet you respecting the measure of the effect which these means have produced. " If the gospel was really introduced by the mighty power of God, why was it not published much earlier.^ It is as easy for the Almighty to exert his power at one time as at another, yet the world was four thousand years old before the gospel appeared. Why is this beneficent religion diffused through so small a portion of the globe ? It has been said that if our earth be divided into thirty equal parts. Paganism is established in nineteen of those parts, Mahome- tanism in six, and Christianity onlj^ in five. Why have the evil pas- sions of men been permitted to mingle themselves with the work of God ? Why has the sword of the persecutor been called in to aid the counsel of heaven ? Why does the gospel now spread so slowly, that the triumphs of this religion seem to have ceased not many centuries after they began? Why has a system, in support of which the Ruler of the universe condescended to make bare his holy arm, degenerated, throughout a great part of the Christian world, iiUo a corrupt form, very far removed from its original simplicity } And why is its influ- ence over the hearts and lives of men so inconsiderable, even in those countries where the truth is taught as it is in Christ Jesus ? This par- tiality, and delay, and imperfection in the propagation of the gospel resembles very much the work of man, whose limited operations cor- respond to the scantiness of his power. But all this is very unlike the word of the Almighty, wliicli runneth swiftly throughout the PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 147 whole earth, to execute all the extent of the gracious purpose formed by the Universal Father of mankind." I have stated these objections in one view with all their force. You will find them not only urged seriously in the works of deistical wri- ters, but thrown out lightly and scoffingly in conversation, so that it behoves you very much to be well apprized of the manner of answer- ing them. It is inipossible for me to enter into any detail upon this subject ; but I shall suggest to you, in the six following propositions, the heads of answers to all objections of this kind, leaving them to be enlarged and applied by your own reading. 1. Observe, that these questions, were they much more pointed and unanswerable than they are, could not have the effect to overturn liistorical evidence. If there be positive satisfying testimony that the divine power was exerted in support of Christianity at its first pro- mulgation, our being unable to account for the particular measure of the effect which that exertion has produced does not, by any clear connection of premises with a conclusion, invalidate the testimony, but only discovers our ignorance of the ways of God; and this is an ignorance which we feel upon every other subject, which, in judging of the works of nature, we never admit as an argument against mat- ter of fact, and which any person, who has just impressions of the limited powers of man, and the immense extent of the divine coun- sels, will not consider as of weight when applied to the evidences of religion. 2. Observe that all the questions imply an expectation that God will bestow the same religious advantages upon the children of men in every age and country. But, as no person who understands the terms which he uses, will say that God is bound in justice to distri- bute his f ivours equally to all his creatures, so no person who attends to the course of Divine Providence will be led to draw any such ex- pectation as the questions imply, from the conduct of the Almighty in other matters. Recollect the diversities of the human species, the differences amongst individuals, in vigour of constitution, in bodily accomplishments, in the powers of understanding, in temper and pas- sions, in the opportunities of improvement, and the measure of com- fort and enjoyment, or of toil and sorrow, which their situations afford. Recollect the differences amongst nations in climate, in government, in the amount of natural and political advantages, and in the whole sum of national prosperity. It is impossible for us to conceive liow the subordination of society could be maintained, if all men had the same talents ; or how the course of human affairs could proceed, if every part of the globe was like every other. Being thus accustomed to behold and to admire the varieties in the natural advantages of men, we are prepared, by the analogy of the works of God, to expect like varieties in their religious advantages ; and although we may not be able to trace all the reasons why the light of the gospel was so long of appearing, or is at present so unequally distributed, yet if we bear in mind that this is but the beginning of our existence, and that every man shall, in the end, be dealt with according to that which had been given him, we shall not for a moment annex the idea of injus- tice to this part of the Divine conduct. 3. Observe that these questions imply an expectation, that, while 148 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. human works admit of preparation, the work of God will, in every case, he done instantly. But it is manifest that this expectation also is contradicted by the whole course of nature. For although God may, by a word of his mouth, do all his pleasure, yet he generally chooses, for wise reasons, some of which we are often able to trace, to employ means, and to allow such a gradual operation of those means, as admits of a progress, in which one thing paves the way for another, and gives notice of its approach. In all that process by which food for man and beast is brought out of tlie ground — in the opening of the human mind from infancy to manhood — and in those natural changes which affect the bowels or the surface of the earth, we profit very much by marking the slow advances of nature to its end ; and therefore we need not be surprised to find the steps of Divine Providence in the publication of the gospel very different from the haste, which, in our imagination, appears desirable. As there is a time of maturity in natural productions to which all the preparation has tended, so the gospel appeared at that season which is styled in Scripture tlie fulness of time, and which is found, upon a close atten- tion to circumstances, to have been the fittest for such a revelation. There is an excellent sermon upon this subject by Principal Robert- son, which you will find in the " Scots Preacher," distinguished by that soundness of thought, and that compass of historical informa- tion, which his other writings may lead you to expect. The same subject will often meet you in the books that you read upon the deist- ical controversy ; and when you attend to the complete illustration which it has received from the writings of many learned men, you will be satisfied that, as the need of an extraordinary revelation was at that time become manifest, so the improvements of science, and the political state of the world, conspired to render the age in which the gospel appeared better qualified than any preceding age for examin- ing the evidences of a revelation, for affording many striking confirm- ations of its divine original, and for conveying it with ease and ad- vantage to future ages.^ The preparation which produced this fulness of time had been carrying forward during four thousand years ; and nearly two thousand have elapsed, while Christianity has been spread- ing through a fifth part of the globe. But this slowness, so agreeable to the general course of nature, will not appear to you inconsistent with the wisdom or goodness of the Almighty, when you, 4. Observe tliat in all this there was a preparation for the universal diff'usion of the gospel. A considerable measure of religious know- ledge was diffused through the world before the appearance of the gospel ; and the delay of its universal publication has perhaps already contributed, and may be so disposed in future as to contribute still more, to prepare the world for receiving it. The few simple doc- trines of that traditional religion which existed before the deluge, were transmitted, by the longevity of the patriarchs, through very few hands for the first fourteen hundred years of the world. Methu- selah lived many years with Adam ; Shem lived many yea^s with Methuselah ; and Abraham lived with Shem till he was seventy-five. Between Adam and Abraham there were only two intermediate links ; yet a chain of tradition, extending through nearly seventeen hundred years, and embracing the creation, the fall, and the promise of a Sa- PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITV. 149 vionr, was preserved. The calling of Abraham, although it conferred peculiar advantages upon his family, was fitted, by his character and situation, to enlighten his neighbours ; and the whole history of tlie Jewish people — their sojourning in Egypt, the place which they were destined to inhabit, their conquests, and the captivities by whicli they were afterwards scattered over the face of the earth, rendered them, in an eminent degree, the lights of the world. Bryant, in his " My- thology," and men who have applied to such investigations, have traced, with much probability, a resemblance to the Mosaic system in the religions of many of the neighbouring nations ; and if we pay any attention to the force of the instances in which this resemblance has been illustrated, even although we should not give credit to all the conjectures that have been advanced, we can hardly entertain a doubt that the revelation with which the Jews were favoured was a source of instruction to other people. During the existence of this peculiar religion wise men were raised, by the providence of God, in many countries, who did not, indeed, pretend to be the messengers of heaven, but whose discoveries exposed the growing corruptions of the established systems, or whose laws imposed some restraint upon the excesses of superstition ; while the progress of society, and the advancement of reason, opened the minds of men to a more perfect instruction than they had formerly been qualified to receive. These hints suggest this enlarged view of the economy of Divine Providence, that God in no age left himself without a witness, and that the several dispensations of religion, in ancient times, both to Jews and heathens, were adapted to the circumstances of the human race, so as to lead them forward by a gradual education from times of infancy and childhood to the rational sublime system unfolded in the gospel. It is following out the same view, to consider the partial propaga- tion of the gospel as intended to prepare the world for receiving it. Many of the heathen moralists, who lived after the days of our Sa- viour, discover more refined notions of God, and more enlarged con- ceptions of the duties of man, than any of their predecessors. They profited by the gospel, although they did not acknowledge the obliga- tion ; and they disseminated some part of its instruction, although they disdained to appear as its ministers. The Koran inculcates the miity of God, and retains a part of the Christian morality ; and thus the successful accommodating religion of Mahomet may be considered as a step, by which the providence of God is to lead the nations that have embraced it from the absurdities of Paganism to the true faith. When Christianity became the established religion of the Roman em- pire, the other parts of the world were very far behind in civilization, and many of the countries that have been lately discovered, are in the rudest state of society. But the conversion of savage trilDcs to a spiritual rational system is impracticable. Much time is necessary to open their understandings, to give them habits of industry and order, and to render them, in some measure, acquainted with ideas and man- ners more polished than their own. A long intercourse with the nations of Europe, who appear fitted by their character to be the in- structors of the rest of the world, may be the mean appointed by God for removing the prejudices of idolatry and ignorance ; and as the • 15* 150 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. enlightened discoveries of modern times make us acquainted with the manners, the views, and the interests, as well as with the geograph- ical situation of all the inhabitants of the globe, we may, not indeed with the precipitancy of visionary reformers, but in that gradual pro- gress which the nature of the case requires, be the instrument of pre- paring them for embracing our religion : and by the measure in which they adopt our improvements in art and science, they may become qualified to receive, through our communication, the knowledge of the true God, and of his Son Christ Jesus. 5. Observe, that the objection, implied in some of the questions that I stated, necessarily arises from the employment of human means in that partial propagation of the Gospel which lias already taken place. Any such objection might have been effectually obviated by a con- tinued miracle ; but it remains to be inquired whether the nature of the case, or the general analogy of Divine Providence, gives any reason to expect this method of obviating the objection. Had the outstretched arm of the Almighty, which first introduced the Gospel, continued to be exerted through all succeeding ages in the propaga- tion of it, the course of human affairs would have been unhinged, and the argument from miracles would have been weakened, because the extraordinary interposition of the Almighty would, by reason of its frequent returns, have been confounded with the ordinary course of nature. The divine original of the gift, therefore, being ascertained, the hand of him from whom it had proceeded was wisely withdrawn, and human passions and interests were combined, by his all-ruling Providence, to diffuse it in the measures which he had ordained. The pious zeal of many Christians in early and later times, the vanity, ambition, or avarice, which led others to promote their private ends by spreading the faith of Christ, the wide extent of the Roman empire at the time when Christianity became the established religion of the state, the subsequent dismemberment of the empire by the invasions and settlements of the barbarous nations, and the spirit of commerce which has carried the descendants of these nations to resfions never visited by the Roman arms, are some of the instruments employed by the providence of God in the propagation of Christianity. It was not to be expected, that in a propagation thus committed to human means, the heavenly gift would escape all contamination from the imperfect and impure channels through which it was conveyed ; and it cannot be denied that there have been many corruptions, many improper methods of converting men to Christianity, and many gross adultera- tions and perversions of" the faith once delivered to the saints." But you will observe in general, that although the gifts of God are liable to abuse through the imperfections and vices of men, such abuse is never considered as any argument that the gifts did not proceed from him : and with regard to the corruptions of Christianity in particular, you will observe, that so far from their creating any presumption against the evidence of our religion, there are circumstances which render them an argument for its divine original. They are foretold in the Scrip- tures. They arose by the neglect of the Scriptures, and they were in a great measure remedied at the Reformation, by the return of a considerable part of the Christian world to that truth which the Scrip- tures declare. The case stands thus. The Gospel contains a system PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIAMTY. 151 of faith and practice, wliich is safely deposited in those autlientic records that are received by the whole Christian world. That system was indeed deformed in its progress by the errors and passions of men. hut it breaks through this cloud by its own intrinsic light. The striking manner in which the prophecy of the corruptions of Chris- tianity has been fulfilled forms an important branch of the evidence of our religion. The discussions which they occasion have contri- buted very much to render the nature of the Gospel more perfectly imderstood ; and the further that the Christian world departs either from those corruptions to which the Reformation applied a remedy, or from any others which the Scriptures condemn, the divinity of their religion will become the more manifest. Hence you may perceive an advantage arising from the slowness with which the Gospel was pro- pagated for many centuries. In its rapid progress before the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, the pure doctrine of the apostles was carried by themselves, or their immediate successors, through all the parts of the then known world. But had it spread with equal rapidity in the dark ages, all the absurdities which at that time adhered to it would have spread also ; and so universal a disease could hardly have admitted of any remedy. It is now purified from a great part of the dross. The influence of the Reformation has extended even to Roman Catholic countries ; and in those which are reformed, the progress of knowledge, and the application of sound criticism, are continuing to illustrate the genuine doctrines of Christ. The Gospel will thus be communicated with less adulteration to those parts of the world which are yet to receive the first notice of it : and that free inter- course, which the spirit of modern commerce is now opening between countries which formerly regarded each other with jealousy, may be the means of extirpating the errors of Popery which were sown in remote regions by the zeal of Roman Catholic missionaries. These are pleasing views, sufficient to overpower the peevish objection sug- gested by the corruptions of Christianity ; they lead us to consider the Almighty as making all things work together for the establishment of truth and righteousness upon earth ; and they teach us to rest with assurance in the declaration of Scripture, that " all the kingdoms of the world shall become the kingdoms of our Lord." 6. One part of the objection only remains. It cannot be denied that there is much wickedness in Christian countries, even those which hold the truth in its primitive simplicity. It is not unnatural for a benevolent mind, which wishes the virtue of mankind as the only sure foundation of their happiness, to regret that the Gospel does not produce a more complete reformation of the vices of the world ; and if the most important blessing which a revelation can confer is to turn men from their iniquities, a doubt may sometimes obtrude itself even upon a candid and devout mind, how far the effect really produced is proportioned to the long preparation, and the mighty works which ushered in the Gospel. The following observations serve to remove this doubt. It is extremely difficult to attain to any precise notion of the sum of wickedness in ancient times ; and there are no data upon which we can form any estimate of what would have been the mea- sure of wickedness in the present circumstances of society, if the Gospel had not appeared. The religion of Jesus has extirpated some 152 PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITTT. horrid practices of ancient times : it has refined the manners of men in war, and in several important articles of domestic intercourse ; and it has produced an extension and activity of beneficence unknown in the heathen world. It imposes restraints upon tliose evil passions and inordinate desires, which, were it not for its influence, would be indulged by many without control ; and it cherishes in the breasts of individuals those private virtues of humiUty, patience, and resignation, which do not receive all the honour which is due to them, because their excellence withdraws them from public observation. It ad- dresses itself to every principle of action in the human breast with greater energy than any other system ever did : the tendency of all its parts is to render men virtuous; and if it fails in reforming the world, we cannot conceive any method of reformation consistent with the character of free agents, that is likely to prove effectual. It is according to this character that God always deals with the children of men. Religion joins its influence to reason. But it is an incon- sistency in terms to say that religion should compel men^ to be virtuous, because compulsion destroys the essence of virtue. These observations appear to me to be a sufficient answer to the objection against the truth of Christianity, which has been drawn from its appearing to have little influence upon the lives of Christians. But I am sensible that they are not sufficient to counteract the influ- ence of this objection upon the minds of men. The wickedness of those who call themselves Christians is undoubtedly a reproach to our religion. It is a grief to the friends of Christianity, and the most ready sarcasm in the mouths of its enemies. It is your business, the office for which all your studies are meant to prepare you, to diminish the influence of this objection. If you convert a sinner from the error of his ways, or brighten, by your example and your discourse, the graces of the disciples of Christ, you confirm the argument arising from the propagation of our religion. And the best service that you can render to that honourable cause, in support of which you profess to exert your talents, is to exhibit in your own character the genuine spirit of Christianity, and to illustrate the principles of that doctrine which is according to godliness, in such a manner as may render them, through the blessing of God, the means of improving the cha- racter of your neighbours. The amount of the answers which I have suggested may be sum- med up in a few words. Any objection, arising from the measure of effect produced by the gospel, cannot overturn direct historical evidence of a divine interposition. We are not warranted, by the course of nature, and the conduct of Divine Providence in other mat- ters, to expect either that the Almighty will confer the same religious advantages upon all his creatures, or that he will accomplish, in a short space of time, that publication of the gospel which formed part of his original purpose. A considerable measure of religious know- ledge was diffused through the world during the preparation for the appearance of the gospel, and the delay of its universal publication may contribute to prepare the world for receiving it. The corrup- tions of Christianity, which arose unavoidably from the human means employed in its propagation, could not have been obviated without a continued miracle ; and the imperfect degree in which the gospel has PROPAGATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 153 actaally reformed the world, however much it may be a matter of regret to Christians, yet, when compared with the excellence and en- ergy of the doctrine, is only a proof that religion was given to improve, but not to destroy, the character of reasonable agents. Besides the books mentioned in the course of this chapter, you rnay read two excellent sermons of Bishop Atterbury, on the Miraculous Propagation of the Gospel. You will derive the most enlarged views upon this, as upon every other subject connected with Christianity, from Butler's Analogy, particularly from Part ii. chap. \i. at the be- ginning. Consult also Jortin. Law's Considerations on the Theory of Religion. Paley's Evidences, vol. ii. Hill's Sermons. Shuvv and Dick upon the Counsel of Gamaliel. Macknight's Truth of the Gospel History ; a book that deserves to be better known, and more generally read than it is. All the authorities and arguments, which are concisely stated by other writers, are spread out in that large work with a fulness and clearness of illustration that is very useful, and, in many places, with a degree of acuteness and in- genuity that is not commonly met with. He has dealt very largely upon the argument for the truth of the Christian religion, which arises from the conversion of the world to Christianity. You will find, in this part of his work, a most complete elucidation of the whole argument — the history of the ten persecutions before Constantino — and a great deal of information with which it is highly proper your minds should be furnished, and which you will not easily gather from any other single treatise. BOOK II. GENERAL VIEW OF THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. CHAPTER I. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. I HAVE Stated the evidence upon Avhich we receive the books of the New Testament as authentic genuine records ; and I have long been employed in examining this high claim which they ad- vance, that they contain a divine revelation. It appeared that this claim was not contradicted by the general contents of the books, but rather that there was a presumption arising from thence in its favour. We found the claim directly supported by miracles received upon clear historical evidence, by the agreement of the new dispensation with a train of prophecies contained in books that are certainly known to have existed many ages before our Saviour was born, by the striking fulfilment of his prophecies, by his resurrection from the dead, by the miraculous powers conferred upon his apostles after his ascension, and by the propagation of his religion. But, even after this review of the principal evidences of the truth of Christianity, there remains a very interesting question, before we are prepared to enter upon a particular examination of the system of truth revealed in the books of the New Testament. The question is, whether we are to regard these books as inspired writings ? It is pos- sible, you will observe, that Christ was a divine messenger, that the persons whom he chose as his companions during his abode upon earth were endowed by him with the power of working miracles ; and yet that, in recording the history of his life, and publishing the doctrines of his religion, they were left merely to the exercise of their own recollection and understanding. Upon this supposition, the mira- cles of our Lord and his apostles may be received as facts established by satisfying historical evidence ; and an inference may be dmwn from them, that the person who performed such works, and who com- mitted to his disciples powers similar to his own, was a teacher sent from God ; and yet the writings of the apostles will be considered as human compositions, distinguished from the works of other men 1.51 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 155 merely by the superior advantages which the authors had derived from the conversation of such a person as Jesus, but in no respect dictated by the Spirit of God. This is the system of the modern Socinians, which their eagerness to get rid of some of the doctrines, that other Christians consider as clearly revealed in Scripture, has led them of late openly to avow. I quote the sentiments of Dr. Priestley from one of his latest publica- tions, the very srane in which he bears a strong testimony to the cre- dibility of the resurrection of Jesus. " I think that the Scriptures were written without any particular inspiration, by men who wrote according to the best of their knowledge, and who, from their circum- stances, could not be mistaken with respect to the greater facts of which they were proper witnesses, but (like other men subject to pre- jndice) might be liable to adopt a hasty and ill-grounded opinion concerning things which did not fall within the compass of their own knowledge, and which had no connection with any thing that was so." " Setting aside all idea of the inspiration of the writers, I con- sider Matthew and Luke as simply historians, whose credit must be determined by the circumstances in which they wrote, and the nature of the facts which they relate." And again, when he is speaking of a particular doctrine, in proof of which some passages in the Epistles are generally adduced, Dr. Priestley says, " It is not from a few casual expressions in epistolary writings, which are seldom composed wnth so much care as books intended for the use of posterity, that we can be authorised to infer that such was the serious opinion of the apos- tles. But if it had been their real opinion, it would not follow that it was true, unless the teaching of it should appear to be included in their general commission."* And thus, according to Dr. Priestley, there is no kind of inspiration either in the gospels or the epistles. He admits them to be writings of the apostles. But he maintains that the measure of regard due to any narration or assertion contained in these writings is left to be de- termined by the rules of criticism, by human reason judging how far that assertion or narration was included in the commission of the apostles, i. e. how far it is essential to the Christian religion. Difterent persons entertain different apprehensions concerning that which is essential to revelation. And, according to Dr. Priestley's system, every person being at liberty to deny any part of Scripture that ap- pears to him unessential, there is no invariable standard of our reli- gion ; but the gorpel is to every one just what he pleases to make it. Accordingly Dr. Priestley, who sometimes argues very ably for the divine mission of Jesus, by availing himself of that liberty which he derives from denying the inspiration of Scripture, has successively struck out of his creed many of those articles which appear to us fundamental. And you may judge of the length to which his prin- ciples lead, when one of his followers, in a publication avowedly un- der his protection, has written an essay to show that our Lord was not free from sin. Many years before Dr. Priestley's writings ap- peared, the received notions of the inspiration of the apostles, which had been held by Christians without much examination, were acutely • History of Early Opinions, vol. iv. p. .5, 58 — voL i. p. 70. 156 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. canvassed. Dr. Conyers Middleton, author of the Life of Cicero, has done eminent service to the Protestant cause, by exposing the impos- ture of the Popish miracles, and by tracing, in liis Letter from Rome, the Ijeathen original of many ceremonies of the church of Rome. But his attachment to Christianity itself is very suspicious, and he is far from being a safe guide in any questions respecting the truth of our holy faith. In some of his misceUaneous tracts, he infers from the dispute between Peter and Paul at Antioch,* from the variations in the four evangelists, and from other circumstances, that the inspi- ration of the apostles was only an occasional illapse, communicated to their minds at particular seasons, as the power of working mira- cles was given them only at those times when they had occasion to exert it; that they were not under the continual direction of aw un- erring spirit ; and that, on ordinary occasions, they were in the con- dition of ordinary men. Nearly the same opinion was held by the late Gilbert Wakefield, who was a disciple of Priestley, but who does not appear to advance so far as his master. He contends, that a plenary infallible inspiration, attending and controlling the evangel- ists in every conjuncture, is a doctrine not warranted by Scripture, unnecessary, and injurious to Christianity; although he admits that the illuminating Spirit of God had purified their minds, and enlarged their ideas. The system of Bishop Benson, in his essay concerning inspiration, prefixed to his paraphrase of St. Paul's epistles, is, that the whole scheme of the gospel was communicated from heaven to the minds of the apostles, was faithfully retained in their memories, and is expounded in their writings by the use of their natural facul- ties. The loose notions concerning inspiration, entertained by the vulgar and by those who never thought deeply of the subject, go a great deal farther. But it is proper that you should know distinctly what is the measure and kind of inspiration which we are warranted to hold. In order to establish your minds in the belief that the Scriptures are given by inspiration of God, it is necessary to begin with observing, that inspiration is not impossible. The Father of Spirits may act upon the minds of his creatures, and this action may extend to any degree which the purposes of divine wisdom require. He may superintend the minds of those who write, so as to prevent the possi- bility of error in their writings. This is the lowest degree of inspira- tion. He may enlarge their understandings, and elevate their con- ceptions beyond the measure of ordinary men. This is a second degree. Or he may suggest to them the thoughts which they shall express, and the words which they shall employ, so as to render them merely the ..vehicles of conveying his will to others. This is the highest degree of inspiration. No sound theist will deny that all three degrees are possible ; and it remains to be inquired, what reason we have for thinking that the Almighty did act in any such manner upon the minds of the writers of the New Testament. If they were really inspired, the evidence of the fact will probably ascertain the measure of inspiration which was vouchsafed to them. The evidence consists of the following parts: The inspiration of the apostles was • Gal. ii. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 157 necessary for the purposes of their mission — It was promised by our Lord — It is claimed by themselves — The claim was admitted by their disciples— And it is not contradicted by any circumstance in their writings. I. Inspiration of the apostles appears to have been necessary for the purposes of their mission ; and, therefore, if we admit that Jesus came from God, and that he sent them forth to make disciples of all nations, we shall acknowledge that some degree of inspiration is highly probable. The first light in which the books of the New Testament lead us to consider the apostles is, as the historians of Jesus. After having been his companions during his ministry, they came forth to bear witness of him ; and as the benefit of his religion was not to be con- fined to the age in which he or they lived, they left in the four Gos- pels a record of v/hat he did and taught. Two of the four were written by the apostles Matthew and John. Mark and Luke, whose names are prefixed to the other two, were probably of the seventy whom our Lord sent out in his lifetime ; and we learn from the most ancient Christian historians, that the gospel of Mark was revised by Peter, and the gospel of Luke by Paul ; and that both were after- wards approved by John, so that all the four may be considered as transmitted to the church with the sanction of apostolical authority. Now, if you recollect the condition of the apostles, and the nature of their history, you will perceive that, even as historians, they stood in need of some measure of inspiration. Plato might feel himself at liberty to feign many things of his master Socrates, because it mat- tered little to the world whether the instruction that was conveyed to them proceeded from the one philosopher or from the other. But the servants of a divine teacher, who appeared as his witnesses, and pro- fessed to be the historians of his life, were bound by their office to give a true record. And their history was an imposition upon the world, if they did not declare exactly and literally what they had seen and heard. This was an office which required not only a love of the truth, but a memory more retentive and more accurate than it was possible for persons of the character and education of the apostles to possess. To relate, at the distance of twenty years, long moral discourses, which were not originally written, and which were not attended with any striking circumstances that might imprint them upon the mind ; to preserve a variety of parables, the beauty and significancy of which depended upon particular expressions ; to re- cord long and minute prophecies, where the alteration of a single plirase might have produced an inconsistency between the event and the prediction ; and to give a particular detail of the intercourse which Jesus had with his friends and with his enemies ; all this is a work so very nmch above the capacity of unlearned men, that, had they attempted to execute it by their own natural powers, they must have fallen into such absurdities and contradictions as would have betrayed them to every discerning eye. It was therefore highly expedient, and even necessary for the faith of future ages, that besides those opportunities of information which the apostles enjoyed, and that tried integrity which they possessed, their understanding and their memory should be assisted by a supernatural influence, which 16 158 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. might prevent them from mistaking the meaning of what they had heard, which might restrain them from putting into the mouth of Jesus any words which he did not utter, or from omitting what was important, and which might thus give us perfect security, that the Gospels are as faithful a copy, as if Jesus himself had left in writing those sayings and those actions wliich he wished posterity to remem- ber. But we consider the apostles in the lowest view, when we speak - of them as barely the historians of their Master. In their epistles they assume a higher character, which renders inspiration still more necessary. All the benefit, which they derived from the public and the private instructions of Jesus before his death, had not so far opened their minds as to qualify them for receiving the whole counsel of God. And he, who knows what is in man, declares to them the night on which he was betrayed, " I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now."* The purpose of many of his parables, the full meaning even of some of his plain discourses, had not been attained by them. They had marvelled when he spake to them of earthly things. But many heavenly things of his kingdom had not been told them : and they, who were destined to carry his religion to the ends of the earth, themselves needed, at the time of their receiving this commission, that some one should instruct them in the doctrine of Christ. It is true that, after his resurrection, Jesus opened their understandings, and explained to them the Scriptures,, and he continued upon earth forty days, speaking to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. It appears, however, from the history which they have recorded in the book of Acts, that some further teaching was necessary for them.t Immediately before our Lord ascended, their minds being still full of the expectation of a temporal kingdom, they say unto him. Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel ? It was not till some time after they received the gift of the Holy Ghost, that they understood that the gospel had taken away the obligation to observe the ceremonies of the Mosaic law : and the action of Peter in baptizing Cornelius, a devout heathen, gave offence to some of the apostles and brethren in Judea when they first heard it.J Yet in their epistles, we find just notions of the spiritual nature of the religion of Jesus as a kingdom of righteousness, the faithful subjects of which are to receive remis- sion of sins, and sanctification through his blood, and just notions of the extent of this religion as a dispensation, the spiritual blessings of which are to be communicated to all in every land who receive it in faith and love. These notions appear to us to be the explication both of the ancient predictions, and of many particular expressions that occur in the discourses of our Lord. But it is manifest that they had not been acquired by the apostles during the teaching of Jesus. They are so adverse to every thing which men educated in Jewish prejudices had learned, and had hoped, that they could not be the fruit of their own reflections ; and, therefore, they imply the teachnig of that Spirit who gradually impressed them upon the mind, guiding the apostles gently, as they were able to follow him, into all the truth • John XV. 12. -j- Acts ch. i. t Acts ch. xi. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 159 connected with the salvation of mankind. As inspiration was neces- sary to give the minds of the apostles possession of the system that is unfolded in their epistles, so many parts of that system are removed at such a distance from human discoveries, and are liable to such misapprehension, that unless we suppose a continued superintendence of the Spirit by whom it was taught, succeeding ages would not have a sufficient security that those, who were employed to deliver it, had not been guilty of gross mistakes in some most important doctrines. Inspiration will appear still further necessary, when you recollect that the writings of the apostles contain several predictions of things to come. Paul foretells, in his epistles, the corruptions of the church of Rome, and many other circumstances which have taken place in the history of the Christian church : and the Revelation is a book of prophecy, of which part has been already fulfilled, while the rest, we trust, will be explained by the events which are to arise in the course of Providence. But prophecy is a kind of writing which implies the highest degree of inspiration. When predictions, like those in Scrip- ture, are particular and complicated, and the events are so remote and so contingent as to be out of the reach of human sagacity, it is plain that the writers of the predictions do not speak according to the mea- sure of information which they had acquired by natural means, but are merely the instruments through which the Almighty communi- cates, in such measure and such language as he thinks fit, that know- ledge of futurity which is denied to man. And although the full meaning of their own predictions was not understood by themselves, they will be acknowledged to be true prophets, when the fulfilment comes to reflect light upon that language, which, for wise purposes, WHS made dark at the time of its being put into their mouth. Thus the nature of the writings of the apostles suggests the neces- sity of their having been inspired. They could not be accurate his- torians of the life of Jesus without one degree of inspiration ; nor safe expounders of his doctrine without a higher; nor prophets of distant events without the highest. As all the three degrees are equally possible to God, it is natural to presume, from the end for which the apostles were sent, that the degree wliichwas suited to every part of their writings was not withheld; and we find the promise of Jesus perfectly agreeable to this presumption. II. Inspiration of the apostles was promised by our Lord. It is not unfair reasoning to adduce promises contained in the Scriptures themselves, as proofs of their divine inspiration. It were, indeed, reasoning in a circle, to bring the testimony of the Scriptures in proof of the divine mission of Jesus. But that being established by the evidence which has been stated, and the books of the New Testament having been proved to be the authentic genuine records of the per- sons whose names they bear, we are warranted to argue from the declarations contained in them, what is the measure of inspiration which Jesus was pleased to bestow upon his servants. He might have been a divine teacher, and they might have been his apostles, although he had bestowed none at all. But his character gives us security that they possessed all that he promised. We read in the gospels that Jesus " ordained tv/elve that they should be witli him, 160 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. and that he might send them forth to preach."* And as this was the purpose for which they were first called, so it was the charge left them at his departure — " Go," said he, "preach the gospel to every creature ; make disciples of all nations."! His constant familiar in- tercourse with them was intended to qualify them for the execution of this charge ; and the promises made to them have a special refe- rence to the office in which they were to be employed. When he sent them during his life to preach in the cities of Israel, he said, " But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak, for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."t And when he spake to them in his pro- phecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, of the persecutions which they were to endure after his death, he repei^ts the same promise : " For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist."§ It is admitted that the words in both these passages refer properly to that assistance, which the inex- perience of the apostles was to derive from the suggestions of the Spirit, when they should be called to defend their conduct and their cause before the tribunals of the magistrates. But the fulfilment of this promise was a pledge, both to the apostles and to the world, that the measure of inspiration necessary for the more important purpose implied in their commission would not be withheld ; and accordingly, when that purpose came to be unfolded to the apostles, the promise of the assistance of the Spirit was expressed in a manner which ap- plies it to the extent of their commission. In the long affectionate discourse recorded by John, when our Lord took a solemn farewell of the disciples, after eating the last passover with them, he said, " And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Com- forter, that he may abide with you for ever : even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him. But ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now. Hovvbeit, when he the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth ; for he shall not speak himself, but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak ; and he will show you things to come."|| Here are all the degrees of inspiration which we found to be neces- sary for the apostles : the Spirit was to bring to their remembrance what they had heard — to guide them into the truth, which they were not then able to bear — and to show them thin2:s to come; and all this they were to derive, not from occasional illapses, but from the perpetual inhabitation of the Spirit. That this inspiration was vouch- safed to them, not for their own sakes, but in order to qualify them for the successful discharge of their office as the messen2:-^rs of Christ, and the instructors of mankind, appears from several expressions of • Mark iii. 14. f Mark xvi. 16 ; Matt, xxviii. If). Sec original. i Matt. X. 19, 20. See original. § Luke xxi. 15. I John xiv. 16, 17, 26: xvi. 12, 13. See original. f INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 161 tliat prayer which immediately follows the discourse containing the promise of inspiration ; particularly from these words, " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word ; that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee ; that they may be one in us ; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."* In conformity to this prayer, so becoming him who was not merely the friend of the apostles, but the light of the world, is that charge which he gives them immediately before his ascension. " Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in tlie name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded yoii : and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world," — the conclusion of the age that has been introduced by my appear- ance, I am with you alway, not by my bodily presence, for imme- diately after he was taken out of their sight, but I am with you by the Holy Ghost, wliich I am to send upon you not many days hence, and which is to abide with you for ever.t The promise of Jesus then implies, according to the plain construc- tion of the words, that the apostles, in executing their commission, were not to be left wholly to their natural powers, but were to be assisted by that illumination and direction of the Spirit which the nature of the commission required ; and you may learn the sense which our Lord had of the importance and effect of this promise from one circumstance, that he never makes any distinction between his own words and those of hisapostles,but places the doctrines and command- ments which they were to deliver upon a footing with those which he had spoken : " He that heareth you, heareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me ; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me,"J These words plainly imply, that Christians have no warrant to pay less regard to any thing contained in the Epistles than to that which is contained in the Gospels; and teach us, that every doctrine and precept clearly delivered by the apostles, comes to the Christian world with the same stamp of divine authority as the words of Jesus, who spake in the name of him that sent him. The author of our religion, having thus made the faith of the Chris- tian world to hang upon the teaching of the apostles, gave the most signal manifestation of the fulfilment of that promise which was to qualify them for their office, by the miraculous gifts with which they were endowed on the day of Pentecost, and by the abundance of those gifts which the imposition of their hands was to diffuse through the church. One of the twelve indeed, whose labours in preaching the Gospel were the most abundant and the most extensive, was not present at this manifestation, for Paul was not called to be an apostle till after the day of Pentecost. But it is very remarkable, that the manner of his being called was expressly calculated to supply this deficiency. As he journeyed to Damascus, about noon, to bring the Christians who were there bound to Jerusalem, there shone from heaven a great light around about him. And he heard a voice, saying, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. And I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness, both of these • John xvii, 20, 21. f Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. See original. i Luke x. 16. 10* 2 A 162 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee ; and now I send thee to the Gentiles to open their eyes.* In reference to this manner of his being called, Paul generally inscribes his epistles with these words : Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will or by the commandment of God ; and he explains very fully what he meant by the use of this expression, in the begin- ning of his epistle to the Galatians, where he gives an account of his conversion. " Paul an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead. I neither received the Gospel of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. When it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen ; imme- diately I conferred not with flesh and blood, neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me ; but 1 went unto Arabia."t All that we said of the necessity of inspiration, and of the import of the promise which Jesus made to the other apostles, receives very great confirmation from this history of Paul, who, being called to be an apostle after the ascension of Jesus, received the Gospel by immediate revelation from heaven, and was thus put upon a footing with the rest, both as to his designation, which did not proceed from tiie choice of man, and as to his qnaliiications, which were imparted not by human instruction, but by the teaching of the author of Chris- tianity. The Lord Jesus, who appeared to him, might furnish Paul \yith the same advantages which the other apostles had derived from his presence on earth, and might give him the same assurance of the inhabitation of the Spirit that the promises, which we have been con- sidering, had imparted to those. III. Inspiration was claimed by the apostles, and their claim may be considered as the interpretation of the promise of their Master. You will not find the claim to inspiration formally advanced in the Gospels. This omission has sometimes been stated by those super- ficial critics whose prejudices serve to account for their haste, as an objection against the existence of inspiration. But if you attend to the reason of the omission, you will perceive that it is only an instance of that delicate propriety which pervades all the New Testament. The Gospels are the record of the great facts which vouch the truth of Christianity. These facts are to be received upon the testimony of men who had been eye-witnesses of them. The foundation of Christian faith being laid in an assent to these facts, it would have been preposterous to have introduced in support of them, that super- intendence of the Spirit which preserved the minds of the apostles from error. For there can be no proof of the inspiration of the apostles, unless the truth of the fucts be previously admitted. The apostles, therefore, bring forward the evidence of Christianity in its natural order, when they speak in the Gospels as the companions and eye-witnesses of Jesus, claiming that credit which is Hue to honest men who had the best opportunities of knowing what they declared. This is the language of John.J " Many other signs did • Actsxxvi. 12— 18. f Gal. i. 1,13, 15, 16, 17. t John XX. 30, 31, and xxi. 24. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 163 Jesus in the presence of his disciples. But these are written that ye may believe, and this is the disciple which testifieth these thnigs." The evangelist Luke appears to speak ditierently in the introduction to his Gospel ;* and opposite opinions have been entertained respect- ing the information conveyed by that introduction. There is a difference of opinion, first, with regard to the time when Luke wrote his Gospel. It appears to some to be expressly intimated that he wrote after Matthew and Mark, because he speaks of other Gospels tlien in circulation ; and it is generally understood that John wrote iiis after the other three. But the manner in which Luke speaks of these other Gospels does not seem to apply to those of Mat- thew and Mark. He calls them many, which implies that they were more than two, and which would confound these two canonical Gos- pels with imperfect accounts of our Lord's life, which we know from ancient writers were early circulated, but were rejected after the four Gospels were published. It is hardly conceivable that Luke would have alluded to the two Gospels of Matthew and Mark without dis- tinguishing them from other very inferior productions ; and therefore it is probable, that when he used this mode of expression, no accounts of our Lord's life were then in existence but those inferior produc- tions. There appears also to very sound critics to be internal evidence that Luke wrote first. He is much more particular than the other evangelists in his report of our Lord's birth, and of the meetings with his apostles after his resurrection. They might think it unnecessary to introduce the same particulars into their Gospels after Luke. But if they wrote before him, the want of these particulars gives to their Gospels an appearance of imperfection which we cannot easily ex- plain. The other point suggested by this introduction, upon which there has been a ditlerecne of opinion, is, whether Luke, who was not an apostle, wrote his Gospel from personal knowledge, attained by his being a companion of Jesus, or from the information of others. Our translation certainly favours the last opinion ; and it is the more general opinion, defended by very able critics. Dr. Randolph, in the first volume of his works, which contains a history of our Saviour's life, supports the first opinion, and suggests a punctuation of the verses, and an interpretation of one word, according to which that opinion may be defended. Read the second and third verses in con- nexion. KaOioj na^i^oaav jy^iv ot art' a^XV^ avtort-fai xat vrtJj^fTai yivofxivoi. rov ?.o)'od ESo*£ xajitot, fta^r^xokoverixofi, oiVuOtv rtatjiv axgiScoj xaOs^tj; eoi y^a^ai, x^atiate ©lo^ty.s. By jjiw"' is understood the Christian world, who had received informa- tion, both oral and written, from those that had been avroTttai. xav inr^iftai. Kauot mcaus Luke, who proposed to follow the example of those avtontat, in writing what he knew ; and he describes his own knowledge by the word rto^y^xoxovOr^xoii, which is more precise than tlie circumlocution, by which it is translated, "having had perfect under- standing of all things." Perfect understanding may be derived from various^ sources : but na^axoxovdeu properly means, I go along with as a companion, and derive knowledge from my own observation. And, it is remarkable, that the word is used in this very sense by the Jew- • Luke i. 1—4. 164 INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. ish historian Josephus, who published his history not many years after Luke wrote, and who in his introduction represents himself as worthy of credit, because he had not merely inquired of those who knew, but Tta^i^xoxovOrjxora, ■coLiyeyofoai,!', wliicli lie explains by this expres- sion, Tioxxi^v ft,iv ajveov^yoi Ti^o^toiv, Ti'Kii.s'tt^v b^oMtorftYii ytvoj/.tvoi;. Jf tliis inter- pretation is not approved of, then, according to tiie sense of those verses which is most commonly adopted, Luke will be understood to give in the second verse, an account of that ground upon which the knowledge of the Christian world with regard to these things rested, the reports of the avrortrat xat i-rt^j^fTac, ; and to state in the third verse, that he, having collected and collated these reports and employed the most careful and minute investigation, had resolved to write an ac- count of the life of Jesus. Here he does not claim inspiration : he does not even say that he was an eye-witness. But he says that, having like others heard the report of eye-witnesses, lie had accurately examined the truth of what they said, and presented to the Christian world the fruit of his researches. The foundation is still the same as in John's gospel, the report of those in whose presence Jesus did and said what is recorded. To this report are added, L The investigation of Luke, a contemporary of the apostles, the companion of Paul in a great part of his journey- ings, and honoured by him with this title, " Luke the beloved physi- cian."* 2. The approbation of Paul, who is said by the earliest Christian writers to have revised this gospel, written by his com- panion, so that it came abroad with apostolical authority. 3. The universal consent of the Christian church, which, although jealous of the books that were tlien published, and rejecting many that claimed the sanction of the apostles, has uniformly, from the earliest times, put the Gospel of Luke upon a footing with those of Matthew and Mark ; a clear demonstration that they who had access to the best informa- tion knew that it had been revised by an apostle. As then tlie authors of the Gospels appear under the character of eye-witnesses, attesting what they had seen, there would have been an impropriety in their resting the evidence of the essential facts of Christianity upon inspiration. But after the respect which their character and their conduct procured to their testimony, and the visible confirmatioij which it received from heaven, had established the faith of a part of the world, a belief of their inspiration became necessary. They might have been credible witnesses of facts, although they had not been distinguished from other men. But they were not qualified to execute the office of apostles without being inspired. And therefore, as soon as the circumstances of the church required the execution of that office, the claim which had been conveyed to them by the promise of their Master, and which is implied in the apostolical character, appears in their writings. They iiistantly exercised the authority derived to them from Jesus, by planting ministers in the cities where they had preached the gospel, by setting every thing per- taining to these Christian societies in order, by controlling the exer- cise of those miraculous gifts which they had imparted, and by cor- recting the abuses which happened even in their time. But they de- * Coloss. iv. 14. INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE. 165 manded, from all who had received the faith of Christ, submission to the doctrines and commandments of his apostles, as tiie insphed mes- sengt^rs of heaven. " But God hath revealed it," not tliem, as our translators have supplied the accusative, revealed the wisdom of God, the dispensation of the Gospel "unto us by his Spirit; for the Spirit scarcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. Now we liave re- ceived not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God ; that we might know the tilings which are freely given us of God ; which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth."* " If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that 1 write unto you are the commandments of the Lord :" i. e. Let no eminence of spiritual gifts be set up in opposition to the authority of the apostles, or as implying any dispensation from submitting to it.t " For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God. "J Peter speaking of the epistles of Paul, says, " Even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you."§ And John makes the same claim of inspiration for the other apostles, as well as for himself " We are of God : he that knoweth God, heareth us ; he that is not of God, heareth not us."|| The claim to inspiration is clearly made by the apostles in those passages, where they place their own writings upon the same footing with the books of the Old Testament ; for Paul, speaking of the ifga yea,u.uora, a commou expression among the Jews for their scrip- tures, in which Timothy had been instructed from his childhood, says, " All scripture is given by inspiration of God."1I Peter, speaking of the ancient prophets, says, " The Spirit of Christ was in them ;" and " The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."** And the quotations of our Lord and his apostles from the books of the Old Testament are often introduced with an expression in which their inspiration is directly asserted. "Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias ;" " By the mouth of thy servant David thou hast said,"tt &c. &c. With this uniform testimony to that inspiration of the Jewish scrip- tures, which was universally believed among that people, you are to conjoin this circumstance, that Paul and Peter in different places rank their own writhigs with the books of the Old Testament. Paul com- mands that his epistles should be read in the churches, where none but those books which the Jews believed to be inspired were ever read.Jt He says that Christians " are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets;" tTtttc^^sft.tXKUi'tiov artoato-Kw xa.i7i^o occludo/tiom whence comes f^ww, in sacris instituo, • Vol ii. book ii. 4. 204 DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. referring to the silence which the initiated were required to observe ; and from ."ff" comes ^vari^^ioi/, the amount of which may be considered as equivalent to arcanum. The writers of the New Testament have adopted this word, which was at tliat time well understood ; and it is used by them in a variety of instances to denote that which God had purposed, but winch was not known to men till he was pleased to reveal it. When the disciples of Jesus came to him, and said, " Why speakest thou to the people in parables ?" his answer was, Matt. xiii. 11, "Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given," i. e. there are circumstances respecting the nature and the history of my religion, which I explain clearly to you my disciples by whom it is to be pub- lished, but which it is proper at present to convey to the people un- der the disguise of parables. You will not understand however, from these words, that there were always to continue, under the religion of Jesus, two kinds of instruction, one for the initiated, and one for the vulgar ; for our Lord had said to these very disciples a little be- fore. Matt. X. 26,27, "There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, and hid that shall not be known. What I tell you in dark- ness, that speak ye in light, and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the house tops." Accordingly, when the apostles came forth to execute their commission; the character under which they appeared is thus expressed by Paul, 1 Cor. iv. 1 : " Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God:" dispensers of that knowledge which was communicated to us first, for this very purpose, that we might be the instruments of convey- ing it to others. Paul calls the gospel. Col. i. 26, — " The mysterj'' hid from ages and from generations, but now made manifest to his saints," hid from ages, because it was not investigated by reason, and must have remained for ever unknown, if it had not been declared by God in his word. The rejection of the Jewish nation, who had always considered themselves as the favourite people of heaven, is called a mystery, Rom. xi. 25, because it was very opposite to the opinions and expectations of men; and for the same reason, the calling of the heathen by the gospel to partake of all the privileges of the people of God is in many places styled a mystery. Ephes. iii, 3, 5, 6. I men- tion only one other instance, 1 Cor. xv. 51. The resurrection of the body is called a mystery, because, although many philosophers had speculated concerning the immortality of the soul, it had never en- tered into the minds of any that the body was to rise. Dr. Campbell, in the first volume of his new translation of the gospels, has one dissertation upon the word mystery. He states that the leading sense of ^ivatr^^Mv ^ m the Septuagint, the Apocrypha, and the New Testament, is arcanxim, any thing not published to the world, though perhaps communicated to a select number. With his usual accurate and mimite attention, he mentions another meaning very nearly related to the former, or more properly only a particular application of that general meaning. It is sometimes employed to denote the figurative sense, which is conveyed under an}^ fable, parable, allegory, symbolical action, or dream. The reason of this application is obvious. The literal meaning of a fable is open to the senses: the spiritual meaning requires penetration and reflection, and DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 205 is known only to the intelligent. In Rev. i. 20, and xvii. 7, John saw the figures, but he did not understand the meaning intended to be conveyed by them, till it was ex])luined to him by the angel. To him it v/as arcanum. There is an allusion to this import of the word mystery in Mark iv. 11. " Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God ; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables," The Eleusinian mysteries being accessible only to the initiated, the early Christians, to whom the language and the practice of the heathen were familiar, transferred to tlie Lord's Snpper the word mysteries ; because from that ordinance were excluded the catechumens, who had not yet been baptized, and the penitents, who had not yet been restored to the communion of the church. It was administered only to those who had been initiated by baptism ; and from fear of persecution it was often administered in the night. On account of this secrecy, and the select number of communicants, strangers might apprehend a similarity between the Lord's Supper and the heathen mysteries; and from whomsoever this use of the word originated, the Christians might not be unwilling to retain it, as conveying, according to the language of the times, an exalted conception of their distinguishing rites. It appears then, from this deduction, that there are three accepta- tions of the word nw-erie^wv. In the New Testament it is used to express that which God had purposed from the beginning, which was not known till he was pleased to reveal it, but which by the revelation was shown and made manifest. With early ecclesiastical writers, it means the solemn positive rites of our religion; and so, in the com- uuuiion service of the church of England, the elements after conse- cration are called holy mysteries. In modern theological writings, and in the objections of the deists, mystery denotes that which is in its nature so dark and incomprehensible, that it cannot be understood after it is revealed. As this sense is really opposite to the sense in which the Scriptures use the word mystery, it appears to me advisa- ble, both in discourses to the people, and in theological discussions, to choose other expressions for denoting that which cannot be compre- hended. But although, by avoiding an unscriptural use of a Scripture word, we may guard against the abuses and mistakes which the change of its meaning has probably occasioned, yet we readily admit that there are, in the Scripture system of the gospel, many points which we do not fully comprehend. And this is so far from being a solid objection to the gospel, that to every wise inquirer it appears to arise from the nature of that dispensation. In order to account for the difficulties which are found in the revelation made by the gospel, we may follow the same division which occurred when we were speaking of tiie importance of Christianity, and consider the gospel as a republication of the religion of nature, and as a method of saving sinners. 1. Even were the gospel nothing more than a republication of the religion of nature, we could not expect to find every thing in it plain ; for we have experience that many points in natural religion, concern- ing the evidence of which we do not entertain any doubt, are to our understanding full of difficulties. We have very indistinct concep- tions of the nature of spirits, or of the manner in which spirit acts 20 206 DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. upon matter. The eternity and infinity of God are connected with all the intricate speculations concerning time and space. The origin of evil, under the government of a Being, whose wisdom and good- ness are not restrained by any want of power, has perplexed the human mind ever since it began to reason ; and liberty, the very essence of morality, appears to be affected by tliat dependence of a moral agent upon the influence of a superior Being, which is insepa- rable from the notion of his being a creature of God. Reason is unable to solve all the difliculties that have been started upon these points, yet she draws, from premises within her reach, this conclusion, that a Spirit who exists in all times and places exercises a moral government over free agents. Revelation has given assurance to this conclusion, has diff"used the knowledge of it, and inculcates with authority the practical lessons which it implies. But revelation, far from professing to enter into the speculations connected with this conclusion, leaves man, with regard to many metaphysical questions that have no influence upon his virtue or happiness, in the same dark- ness which all the sages of antiquity experienced. A clear explica- tion of these points, supposing it possible, might have afforded amuse- ment to a few inquisitive minds. To the great body of mankind, for whose sake the religion of nature is republished in the gospel, it is insignificant, and would have only loaded a system whose simplicity is fitted to render it of universal use, with subtleties which the gene- rality find neither interesting nor intelligible. Such an explication, then, would have been of little importance. I said, supposing it possible ; for they who demand it, know not what they ask. Difli- culties in any subject are merely relative to the understanding and opportunities of those who consider it. As a child cannot form any conception of the nature of the exertion which is made, or of the object which is proposed in many of the employments of men : as a man, whose mind has been untutored, or whose observation has been narrow, wonders at the discoveries of Astronomy, or the refined operations of art, and while he believes that both exist, is incapable of apprehending the principles upon which they proceed : so it is likely that we feel ourselves involved in an inextricable labyrinth upon questions, which superior orders of being can easily resolve. We inhabit a spot in the creation of God. We are placed in a system consisting of many parts, the relations and dependencies of which are beyond our observation ; and om- faculties in vain attempt to explore the intimate essence of those objects which are most familiar to us. There are measures of knowledge to which our condition is manifestly not suited. There is a degree of mental exertion of which we may be supposed incapable. " Now we see through a glass darkly ;" and it is forgetting our condition and our character, to ask that every thing in nature should at present be made plain to our apprehension. If there be such a thing as Natural Religion, the comfort and improve- ment which it administers cannot imply a kind of illumination, which man is not qualified to receive. They must be compatible with the rank which he holds in the intellectual system, and they may leave him unacquainted with many parts of tliat system, the whole extent of which he is at present incapable of apprehending. It cannot, therefore, be stated as an objection to the gospel, that while, by DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 207 republishing the rehgion of nature, it restores that comfort and im- provement in the most perfect manner, it i\eeps iiis knowledge confined within the limits suited to his condition. Other orders of spirits may clearly apprehend the nature of objects, and the solution of questions, to which his faculties are inadequate ; because the knowledg'e of them is not, in any degree, necessary for his enjoy- ment of the portion, or his discharge of the duties, assigned him by his Creator, 2. If difficulties belong to the Gospel, as it is a republication of the religion of nature, we may expect to meet with more difficulties, when we consider it in its higher character, as the religion of sinners. By this character, the Gospel makes provision for a new situation, which had brought upon men evils, any remedy of which was not sug- gested by their knowledge of nature. We found tliat all those no- tions of the Divine character and government, which constitute natural religion, fail us in this new situation ; and that the assurance of par- don rests upon an interposition of the Creator. What parts of the universe may be affected by that interposition we cannot say : and it is presumptuous to think, that all the branches and the ends of it may be fully comprehended by our understanding, since it is a subject con- fessedly farther beyond our reach than any part of nature. But if the revelation of the gospel leaves no doubt that the interposition has been made, and that the effects of it with regard to us are attained, this is all the knowledge that is of real importance upon the subject. Clear evidence of the fact is sufficient to revive our hopes ; and although the manner in which the interposition is calculated to pro- duce the effect had not been, in any measure, revealed to us, we should have been in no worse situation with regard to this fact than with regard to many others in nature, most important to our being and comfort, where we know that an effect exists, but have no apprehen- sion of the kind of connexion between the effect and its cause. If this interposition involve the agency of other beings that are not made known to us by the light of nature, and if their agency be a ground of hope, or the principle of any duty, the revelation must inform us that they exist. But the knowledge of their existence and agency does not require an intimate acquaintance with their nature. There are in natural religion many intricate questions concerning the manner in which the Deity exists, that do not in the least affect the proof of his existence. The manner in which those beings exist, who are made known to iis merely by revelation, may be still farther removed beyond the reach of our faculties. At any rate the knowledge of it is not necessary for the purposes of the revelation ; and, therefore, although so very little be revealed concerning them, as to leave im- penetrable darkness over all the speculations by which men attempt to investigate the manner in which they are distinguished from one another, and the manner in which they are united, still their existence and their agency may be placed beyond doubt by explicit declarations, and the reHance upon these declarations may establish, on the firmest grounds, that hope which the revelation was meant to convey. Tlie state of the case, then, with regard to the difficulties of rehgion, is precisely this. We have, by reason, the means of acquiring that knowledge which the original condition of our being required, but not 208 DIFFICULTIES IN THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. that which our curiosity may desire ; and accordingly when we launch into questions and speculations of mere curiosity, our pride is rebuked, and we are reminded that " we are of yesterday, and know nothing." The gospel, by the provision which it has made for the change in our original condition, has opened to us a state of things in many respects new, by which we perceive how very limited the range of our natural knowledge was. But this state of things is intimated, only in so far as the provision for our condition renders an intimation necessary ; and while all the facts of real importance to our comfort and hope are published with the most satisfying evidence, we are checked in our speculations concerning this new state of things, by the very scanty measure of light which is afforded us to guide them. This is a view of the extent of our knowledge not very flattering to our pride. But it may be favourable both to our happuiess and to our improvement ; and if we are wise enough to cultivate the temper of mind which such a view is peculiarly calculated to form, we may derive much profit from the bounds which are set to our inquiries, as well as from the enlargement which is given to our hopes. There does arise, however, from this view of our knowledge, one most interesting and fundamental question, which is the subject of my third preliminary observation, What is the use of reason in matters of religion ? Butler. Sherlock. Campbell. USE OF REASON IX RELIGION. 209 CHAPTER V. USE OF REASON IN RELIGION. If the Christian religion contain many pointsVhich we do not fully comprehend, and if we be required to believe these points, a difficulty seems to arise with regard to the boundaries between reason and faith. This is a subject upon which it is of very great importance to form distinct apprehensions, before we proceed to a particular consi- deration of the doctrines of Christianity. When you study church history, you will find that this question has been agitated in various forms from the beginning of Christianity to this day. It is not my province to relate the progress of this dispute, or the different appear- ances which it has assumed. And, in truth, many of the controver- sies to which it has given occasion are insignificant, because when they are examined they appear to be purely verbal. Those who said that reason was of no use in matters of religion, sometimes meant nothing more than that religion derived no benefit from that which is really the abuse of reason, false philosophy, and the jargon of meta- physics. The argument was kept up by the equivocation between reason and the abuse of reason ; and had the disputants shown them- selves wiUing to understand one another by defining the terms which they used, it would have appeared that there was very little differ- ence in their opinions. But this account will not apply to all the controversies that have turned upon this question. The subUme incomprehensible nature of some of the Christian doctrines has so completely subdued the under- standing of many pious men, as to make them think it presumptuous to apply reason any how to the revelation of God ; and the many instances in which the simplicity of truth has been corrupted by an alliance with philosophy, confirm them in the belief that it is safer, as well as more respectful, to resign their minds to devout impressions, than to exercise their understandings in any speculations upon sacred subjects. Enthusiasts and fanatics of all different names and sects agree in decrying the use of reason, because it is the very essence of fanaticism to substitute, in place of the sober deductions of reason, the extravagant fancies of a disordered imagination, and to consider these fancies as the immediate illumination of the Spirit of God. Insidious writers in the deistical controversy have pretended to adopt those sentiments of humility and reverence, which are inseparable from true Christians, and even that total subjection of reason to faith which characterises enthusiasts. A pamphlet was pubhshed about 20* 2G 210 USE OF REASON IN RELIOION. the middle of the last century, that made a noise in its day, although it is now forgotten, entitled, Christianity not Founded on Argument, which, while to a careless reader it may seem to magnify the gospel, does in reality tend to undermine our faith, by separating it from a rational assent ; and Mr. Hume, in the spirit of this pamphlet, con- cludes his Essay on Miracles, with calling those dangerous friends or disguised enemies to the Christian religion, who have undertaken to defend it by the principles of human reason. " Our most holy reli- gion," he says, with a disingenuity very unbecoming his respectable talents, " is founded on faith, not on reason," — and " mere reason is insufficient to convince us of its veracity." The Church of Rome, in order to subject the minds of her votaries to her authority, has re- probated the use of reason in matters of religion. She has revived an ancient position, that things may be true in theology which are false in philosophy ; and she has, in some instances, made the merit of faith to consist in the absurdity of that which was believed. The extravagance of these positions has produced, since the Re- formation, an opposite extreme. While those who deny the truth of revelation consider reason as in all respects a sufficient guide, the So- cinians, who admit that a revelation has been made, employ reason as the supreme judge of its doctrines, and boldly strike out of their creed every article that is not altogether conformable to those notions which may be derived from the exercise of reason. These controversies, concerning the use of reason in matters of re- ligion, are disputes not about words, but about the essence of Chris- tianity. They form a most interesting object of attention to a student in divinity, because they affect the whole course and direction of his studies; and yet, it appears to me that a few plain observations are sufficient to ascertain where the truth lies in this subject. 1. The first use of reason in matters of religion is to examine the evidences of revelation. For the more entire the submission which we consider as due to every thing that is revealed, we have the more need to be satisfied that any system which professes to be a divine revelation, does really come from God. It is plain from the review which we took of the evidences of Christianity, that very large pro- vision is made for affording our minds a rational conviction of its divine original ; and the style of argument, which pervades the dis- courses of our Lord, and the sermons and the writings of his apostles, is a continued call upon us to exercise our reason in judging of that provision. I need not quote particular passages ; for that man must have read the gospels and the Acts of the apostles with a very care- less or a very prejudiced eye, who does not feel the manner in which our religion was proposed by its divine author and his immediate dis- ciples, to be a clear refutation of the position which I mentioned lately, that Christianity is not founded on argument. You will recol- lect, too, that all the different branches of the evidence of Chrisfianity are ultimately resolvable into some principle of reason. The internal evidence of Christianity is only then perceived, when you try the sys- tem of the gospel by a standard which you are supposed to have derived from natural religion. The argument which miracles and prophecies afford is but an inference from the power, wisdom, and holiness of God, all of which you assume as premises that are not disputed ; and USE OF REASON IN BELIGION. 211 that complication of circumstances which constitutes the historical evidence for Christianity, derives its weight from those laws of proba- bihty which experience and reflection suggest as the guide of our judgment. It is not easy to conceive that a creature, who is accus- tomed to exercise his reason upon every other subject, should be re- quired to lay it aside upon a subject so interesting as the evidences of religion ; and it is plain, that to substitute as the ground of our faith certain impressions, tiie liveliness of which depends very much upon the state of the animal spirits, in place of the various exercises of reason which this subject calls forth, is to render that precarious and inexpUcable which might rest upon sure principles, and to disregard the provision made by tlie author of our faith, who hath both com- manded and enabled us to " be always ready to give an answer to every one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in us." 2. After the exercise of reason has established in our minds a firm belief that Christianity is of divine original, the second use of reason is to learn wliat are the truths revealed. As these truths are not in our days communicated to any by immediate inspiration, the know- ledge of them is to be acquired only from books transmitted to us with satisfying evidence that they were written above seventeen hundred years ago, in a remote country, and a foreign language, under the direction of the Spirit of God. In order to attain the meaning of these books, we must study the language in which they were written, and we must study also the manners of the times, and the state of the countries in which the writers lived, because these are circumstances to which an original author is often alluding, and by which his phraseology is generally affected: we must lay together different passages in which the same word or phrase occurs, because without this labour we cannot ascertain its precise signification ; and we must mark the difference of style and manner that characterizes different writers, because a right apprehension of their meaning often depends upon attention to this difference. All this supposes the application of grammar, history, geography, chronology, and criticism in matters of religion, /. e. it supposes that the reason of man had been previously exercised in pursuing these different branches of knowledge, and that our success in attaining the true sense of Scrip- ture depends upon the diligence with which we avail ourselves of the progress that has been made in them. It is obvious that every Christian is not capable of making this application. But this is no argument against the use of reason of which we are now speaking. For they, who use translations and commentaries, only rely upon the reason of others, instead of exercising their own. The several branches of knowledge, which I mentioned, have been applied in every age by some persons for the benefit of others ; and the progress in sacred criticism, which distinguishes the present times, is nothing else but the continued application, in elucidating the Scriptures, of reason enlightened by every kind of subsidiary knowledge, and very much improved in this kind of exercise, by the employment whicfi the ancient classics have given it since the revival of letters. As the use of reason thus leads us into the meaning of the single words and phrases of Scripture, so it is equally necessary to enable us to attain a comprehensive view of the whole system of Scripture 212 USE or REASON IN RELIGION. doctrine. Our Lord said to his apostles a little before his death, " I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now." The Spirit guided them into all truth after the ascension of their master ; and their discourses and epistles are the fruit of that perfect teaching, which they had not been able to receive during his life. The epistles of Paul to the different churches refer to points which he had explained to the Christians when he was with them, or to ques- tions which had risen amongst them after his departure. They men- tion rather incidentally than formally the great truths of the gospel : and there is no passage in them which can be considered as a complete delineation of all that we are called to believe. Yet the apostles speak of" the form of sound words," of" the truth as it is in Jesus," of" the faith once delivered to the saints," for which Christians ought to contend. The knowledge of this form of sound words, this truth and faith, we are left to attain by searching the Scriptures, by com- paring the discourses of our Lord, and the writings of his apostles, by employing expressions which are plain to illustrate those which are obscure, by giving such interpretations of the sacred writers as will preserve their consistency with themselves and with one another, by marking the consequences which are fairly deducible from their explicit declaration, and by framing, out of what is said and what is implied in their writings, a system that shall appear to be fully war- ranted by their authority. Without all this, we do not learn the revelation which is contained in the gospel ; and yet this implies some of the highest exercises of reason, sagacity, investigation, com- parison, abstraction ; and it is the most important service which sound philosophy can render to Christianity, that it enables us by these exercises to attain a distinct and enlarged apprehension of the gospel scheme in all its connexions and consequences. It is very true, that many pious Christians derive much consolation and improve- ment from the particular doctrines of Christianity, althoughthe narrow- ness of their views, and the distraction of their thoughts, render it im- possible for them to form a just and comprehensive view of the whole. But it is the professed object of those who propose to be teachers of Christianity to attain such a view. It is an object for which they are supposed to have leisure and opportunity : and unless they thus know the truth, they are not qualified to show that Christ is indeed "the power of God and the wisdom of God," or to defend the gospel scheme against the objections, and rescue it from the abuses, to which a par- tial consideration has often given occasion. 3. After the two uses of reason that have been illustrated, a third comes to be mentioned, which may be considered as compounded of both. Reason is of eminent use in repelling the attacks of the adver- saries of Christianity. When men of erudition, of philosophical acuteness, and of accom- plished taste, direct their talents against our religion, the cause is very much hurt by an unskilful defender. He cannot unravel their sophis- try ; he does not perceive the amount and the effect of the concessions which he makes to them; he is bewildered by their quotations, and he is often led by their artifice upon dangerous ground. In all ages of the church there have been weak defenders of Christianity ; and the only triumphs of the enemies of our religion have arisen from USE OF REASON IN RELIGION. 213 their being able to expose the defects of those methods of defending the truth, which some of its advocates had unwarily chosen. A mind, trained to accurate philosophical views of the nature and the amount of evidence, enriched with historical knowledge, accustomed to throw out of a subject all that is minute and unrelated, to collect what is of importance within a short compass, and to form the comprehension of a whole, is the mind qualified to contend with the learning, the wit, and the sophistry of infidelity. Many such minds have appeared in this honourable controversy during the course of this and the last century ; and the success has corresponded to the completeness of the furniture with which they engaged in the combat. The Christian doctrine has been vindicated by their masterly exposition from various misrepresentations ; the arguments for its divine original have been placed in their true light ; and the attempts to confound the miracles and prophecies, upon which Christianity rests its claim, with the delusions of imposture, have been eflectually repelled. Christianity has, in this way, received the most important advantages from the attacks of its enemies ; and it is not improbable that its doc- trines would never have been so thoroughly cleared from all the cor- ruptions and subtleties which had attached to them in the progress of ages, nor the evidences of its truths have been so accurately under- stood, nor its peculiar character been so perfectly discriminated, had not the zeal and abilities, which have been employed against it, called forth in its defence some of the most distinguished masters of reason. They brought into the service of Christianity the same weapons which had been drawn for her destruction, and, wielding them with confidence and skill in a good cause, became the successful champions of the truth. I cannot speak of this third use of reason in matters of religion, without recommending to you an excellent book, in which you will find the advantage that Christianity has derived from it very fully illustrated. I mean Dissertations on the genius and evidences of Christianity, by Dr. Gerard, formerly Professor of Divinity in King's College, Aberdeen. All his works show Dr. Gerard to have been an acute distinguishing man. The observations in this book are very ingenious, and although there is in some of them an appearance of remoteness and research that is not perfectly agreeable, yet they are spread out at such length, and placed in so many different views, as to satisfy every reader not only that they are just, but that they add considerable weight to the collateral presumptive evidence of Chris- tianity. The first part of the book is intended to show that the manner in which our Lord and his apostles proposed the evidences of Christianity was the most perfect. It is the second part which relates more directly to our present subject. Dr. Gerard entitled the second part, Christianity confirmed by the opposition of Infidels. He states the advantages which it derived from the opposition of early hifidels, and then, with much useful reference to the present state of theological discussions, the advantages which it has derived from opposition in modern times, and the argument thence arising for its truth. The whole second part is the best illustration, that I can point out, of the use of reason in repelling the attacks of the adversaries of Christianity. 214 USE OF REASON IN RELIGION. But while many of the champions of Christianity have adorned and illustrated that truth which they defended, you will find that others, by a hcentious use of reason, have mutilated the Christian doctrine, and reduced it to little more than a system of morality. And there- fore it becomes necessary to speak, 4. Of the fourth use of reason in judging of the truths of religion. The principles upon this subject are so simple and clear, that I shall be able to state them in a few words ; and, although there has been very gross abuse of reason in judging of the truths of religion, it will not readily occur to you, how any person who understands the prin- ciples can fail essentially in the application of them. Every thing which is revealed by God comes to his creatures from so high an authority, that it may be rested in with perfect assurance as true. Nothing can be received by us as true which is contrary to the dictates of reason, because it is impossible for us to perceive at the same time the truth and the falsehood of a proposition. But many things are true which we do not fully comprehend, and many propositions, which appear incredible when they are first enunciated, are found, upon examination, such as our understanding can readily admit. These principles appear to me to embrace the whole of the subject, and they mark out the steps by which reason is to proceed in judging of the truths of religion. We first examine the evidences of revela- tion. If these satisfy our understandings, we are certain that there can be no contradiction between the doctrines of this true religion, and the dictates of right reason. If any such contradiction appear, there must be some mistake : by not making a proper use of our reason in the interpretation of the gospel, we suppose that it contains doctrines which it does not teach : or, we give the name of right reason to some narrow prejudices which deeper reflection and more enlarged knowledge will dissipate ; or, we consider a proposition as implying a contradiction, when, in truth, it is only imperfectly under- stood. Here, as in every other case, mistakes are to be corrected by measuring back our steps. We must examine closely and impartially the meaning of those passages which appear to contain the doctrine : we must compare them with one another: we must endeavour to derive light from the general phraseology of Scripture and the analogy of faith ; and we shall generally be able, in this way, to separate the doctrine from all those adventitious circumstances which give it the appearance of absurdity. If a doctrine, which, upon the closest examination, appears unquestionably to be taught in Scripture, still does not approve itself to our understanding, we must consider care- fully what it is that prevents us from receiving it. There may be preconceived notions hastily taken up which that doctrine opposes ; there may be pride of understanding that does not readily submit to the views which it communicates ; or reason may need to be remind- ed, that we must expect to find in religion many things which we are not able to comprehend. One of the most important offices of reason is to recognise her own limits. She never can be moved by any authority to receive as true what she perceives to be absurd. But if she has formed a just estimate of the measure of human knowledge, she will not shelter her presumption in rejecting the truths of revela- tion under the pretence of contradictions that do not really exist ; she USE OF REASON IN RELIGION. 215 will readily admit that there may be in a subject some points which she knows, and others of which she is ignorant; she will not allow I'uer ignorance of the latter to shake the evidence of the former ; but will yield a firm assent to that which she does understand, without presuming to deny what is beyond her comprehension. And thus availing herself of all the light which she now has, she will wait in humble hope for the time when a larger measure shall be imparted. The importance, and indeed the meaning, of the principles which I have stated, would be best understood by examples. But were I to attempt to exemplify them, I should anticipate the subjects upon which we are to enter. These principles will often recur in the pro- gress of my Lectures upon the particular doctrines of Christianity ; and therefore I shall content myself with having stated them in this general manner at present. A right apprehension of this fourth use of reason in matters of reli- gion constitutes the defence of Christianity against a large class of objections, that are often urged against some of its peculiar doctrines. You will find it therefore occasionally stated in all the writers who treat of these doctrines, and if there is a proper selection of your read- ing, just views upon this important subject will become familiar to your minds at the same time that you are studying the Scripture system. The best preparation for these views is sound logic, which, in teaching the right use of reason, ascertains its boundaries, and guards against the abuse of it. You bring that furniture with you when you enter upon the study of divinity. You improve it during the prosecution of that study, by reading Bacon, Locke, and Reid, and the other writers who treat of the intellectual powers, and by all those exercises, which render your own intellectual powers more sound and more acute, which increases their vigour, while they check their presumption. I would recommend to you particularly to read and study upon this subject, Reid's Essay on the Intellectual Powers, and five chapters of the 4th book of Locke's Essay on the Human Understanding, which treat of assent, reason, faith and reason, enthu- siasm, wrong assent and error. They contain a most rational, and I think, when properly understood, a just view of reason in judging of the truths of rehgion ; and every student ought to be well acquainted with them. Potter, Prselectiones Theologicoe, vol. iii. Randolph. 216 CONTROVERSIES OCCASIONED BY CHAPTER VI. CONTROVERSIES OCCASIONED BY THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. The last preliminary observation arising out of the general view of the Scripture system respects the controversies, to which that system has given occasion. Even those, who agreed as to the divine authority of the Christian religion, have differed very widely in their interpretation of its doctrines. These differences have not been confined to trifling matters, but have often touched upon points which are said to concern the very essence of the religion, and they, who held the opposite opinions, have discovered a mutual contempt and bitter- ness, very inconsistent with the spirit which might be supposed to animate the disciples of the same Master. When we endeavour to account for the controversies in religion, we must begin with recollecting that there is hardly any subject of speculation, upon which those by whom it has been thoroughly can- vassed have not differed in opinion. The degrees of understanding, and the opportunities of improvement are so various, and there is such variety in the circumstances and connexions which direct men to their first opinions, and which insensibly warp their judgment, that the same subject is seldom viewed by two persons exactly in the same light. Minuter shades of difference are generally overlooked by those who agree in important points. But there are opinions so far removed from one another, that no explication of terms, no con- cessions which either side can make in consistency with their own principle, are sufficient to reconcile them. Hence the different systems which have been framed, and zealously maintained with regard to several branches of natural theology and pneumatics, with regard to the principles of morality, with regard to politics, I do not mean the politics of the day, but the general science of politics, and with regard to various questions in natural philosophy. Any person, who is conversant with the writings of the ancient and modern philosophers, knows that without opposition of interest, merely from a difference in the mode of exercising the understanding upon sub- jects which appear to be within the reach of the human powers, controversies have been agitated ever since men began to speculate, and, after receiving the fullest discussion, have revived in a m\v form with fresh vigour. But, notwithstanding this multiplicity of controversies, which the love of disputation has produced upon all other subjects, it may occur to you, that the authority, with which a messenger of heaven speaks, should put an end to all dispute with regard to the subjects of his mission, amongst those who acknowledge that he comes from God. THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 217 You consider it as essential to a divine revelation, that all which is necessary to be known should there be delivered in explicit terms, and you think it impossible that any Christian should deny those propositions which are clearly contained in Scripture. A little attention, however, to the circumstances of the case, will enable you to reconcile the existence of theological controversy with these principles. The different parts of my discourse upon this subject are, from their nuture, so blended together, that I shall not attempt to keep them asunder by separate heads. But the points to which I am to call your attention, as serving to account for the multiplicity of theological controversies, are these — the manner in which the truths of the gospel are to be learned, — the nature and importance of these truths — the sentiments and passions, which, from the weakness of humanity, frequently operated in the breasts of persons who speculated concern- ing them — and the genius of that philosophy in which many of those persons were educated. The truths of the gospel must be deduced from an interpretation of the words of Scripture ; and this interpretation admits of variety, according to the measure in which those who profess to interpret are acquainted with the language, the manners, and the phraseology of the writers, according to the attention which they bestow, and the honesty of mind with which they receive the truth. In the plainest language that can be used, there are metaphorical expressions which some may stretch too far, and others may consider as not admitting of any direct application to the subject. In every discourse extending to a considerable length, there are limitations of general expressions arising out of the occasion upon which they are used, that may be overlooked, or that may be perverted ; and with regard to the gospel in particular, there are pre-conceived opinions, which, by bending every proposition to a conformity with themselves, may lead men far from the truth, without their being conscious of showing any contempt to the authority of the revelation. These causes have operated even with regard to the meaning of the precepts of the gospel, and have produced that casuistical morality, which, while it acknoAvledges Scripture as the standard of practice, has abounded in controversies concerning the application of that standard to particular cases. But the controversies, with which you are chiefly concerned, res- pect not so much the practical parts of our religion as its doctrines ; and you will not be surprised at the multiplicity of these, when you recollect the imperfect measure in which the gospel has opened to the human mind new, interesting, and profound subjects of speculation. We found formerly, that, while the gospel brings the most convincing evidence of the great facts in natural theology, it leaves all the intri- cate questions which have occurred concerning these facts just where they were ; and that, while by revealing a new dispensation of Provi- dence it necessarily mentioned the existence of persons not known by the religion of nature, their relation to us, and the conduct of that scheme in which they are engaged for our benefit, it has communi- cated only such information, with regard to this new set of facts that are to be received upon the authority of revelation, as is of real im- portance, leaving many pouits in darkness. Here is the most fruitful 21 2 H 218 CONTROVERSIES OCCASIONED BY subject of controversy that can be conceived. The propositions revealed in Scripture are so few and simple, that it is hardly possible for those who rest in Scripture to disagree. But the pride of human wisdom does not readily submit to be confined within bounds so nar- row. Those, who have been accustomed to speculate upon other subjects, continue their speculations upon religion, and, forgetting the proper province of reason with regard to truths that are revealed, which is to receive with humility what does not appear upon examina- tion to be absurd, they reject as unimportant every thing that reason did not investigate ; or they endeavour, by -means of reason, to carry their explanations and discoveries far beyond the measure of light contained in the Scripture ; or they embarrass, by the term^ and dis- tinc|;ions of human science, subjects so imperfectly revealed as not to admit of them. It cannot be expected that there should be uniformity in employments such as these, which do not proceed upon certain principles, and do not admit of being reduced to any fixed rule. When men of different modes of education, and different habits of thinking, undervaluing the simplicity of the facts revealed in Scripture, and desirous to be wise above what is written, carry their inquiries into the manner of these facts, they set out from different points, they wander without a guide in a boundless field of conjecture, and, having assumed their premises at pleasure, they arrive at opposite conclu- sions. Even in the days of the apostles, " the form of sound words" which they delivered was complicated, and disguised by the prejudices of those who embraced it. The Jewish converts, retaining an implicit veneration for the teachers of the law, wished to incorporate with the Christian faith all the fables which they found in the writings of their Rabbins ; and many of the heathen converts proceeded to canvass the subjects of revelation, with the presumptuous and inquisitive spirit of the philosophy which they had learned. Hence you read in the Epistles of Paul of " foolish and unlearned questions which gender strife ;" of teachers " who, concerning the truth had erred, and over- threw the faith of some ;" of "fables and endless genealogies;" and of"oppositions of science, falsely so called." We learn from Peter that the unlearned and unstable wrested some things in Paul's Epis- tles that are hard to be understood, and the other Scriptures also, to their own destruction : and it is a tradition from the earliest Chris- tian writers, that John wrote both his first Epistle and his gospel with a view to combat a heresy concerning our Lord's person, which attachment to the oriental philosophy had introduced amongst the first Christians. If controversy thus found a place in the church even under the eye of the apostles, and was not effectually repressed by their explanation of their own words, and by their authority, you may expect that it would multiply fast after their departure, when the only standard of faith was the written word, and no person was entitled to impose his interpretation of that word as the true mind of the apostles. The same presumptuous curiosity, which had appeared in the earliest times, continued to extend to all the parts of Christian doctrine. Men speculated concerning the manner in which the Son and the Spirit exist with the Father. Instead of judging of the evidences of the divine mission of Jesus, they proceeded to scan the reasons of that dis- THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 219 pensation which they were required to bcHeve. They investigated the principles upon which the several parts of the dispensation com- bine in producing the end, and they pretended to ascertain the nature and (he manner of their operation. They spread out the scanty in- formation whicli Scripture affords upon all these subjects into large systems. But the original materials being very few, and the rest being supplied by imagination and false philosophy, the- systems dilfered widely from one another, and it was impossible to find any method of reconciling the ditference. You will not suppose that these discussions proceeded in every in- stance purely from a desire of attaining the truth, or that they were conducted Avith the calm disinterested spirit which becomes a lover of knowledge. Any person, who has that acquaintance with human nature which history and experience atlord, will not be surprised to find that other passions often mingled their influence with the pride of reason. Jealousy of a rival produced opposition to his opinions, so that some systems of theology grew out of a private quarrel. The vices of an individual needed some shelter, and he tried to find it in the zeal and ingenuity with which he brought forward speculations upon some of the points that were then universally interesting. The love of power induced some to stand forth as the leaders in theolo- gical controversy, whilst meaner desires dictated to others the station which they were to assume, and the humble offices by which they were to maintain the combat. Matters of order, ceremonies of wor- ship, and all those usages in Christian societies, which the word of God has left as matters of indifference to be regulated by human pru- dence, were laid hold of by artful men who knew that they were of no essential importance, and placed in such a light as to be the most effectual means of inflaming the minds of the multitude. Some of the earliest and most violent controversies respected the time of cele- brating Easter ; and the history of the church abounds with others equally insignificant. By this mixture of more ignoble principles with the presumptuous curiosity that pried into those " secret things which belong to the Lord," theological subjects became one field for exhibiting the angry passions, which from the beginning of the world have disturbed the peace of society. Had that field been wanting, men would have found other pretexts for acting, from jealousy, am- bition, and avarice ; and many of the controversies of the Christian church are, in one respect, a proof of that depravity of human na- ture, which, notwithstanding the remedy brought by the gospel, con- tinued to operate in the breasts of those who professed to receive that religion. The number and intricacy of theological controversies were very much increased by the philosophy of the times. In the second cen- tury the philosophy of Plato was held in the highest admiration, and some of the learned Christians, having been educated in the schools of the later Platonists, retained the sentiments, and even the dress of philosophers, after they became the disciples of Christ. In the third century, Origen, who by the extent of his erudition, the intenseness of his application, and the vigour of his genius, was qualified to lead the minds not of his contemporaries only, but of succeeding ages, was a professed Platonist. In his theological system, he accommo- 220 CONTROVEPvSIES OCCASIONED BY dates the whole scheme of Christian doctrine to the leading princi- ples of Platonism ; and in his interpretation of the Scriptures, he adopts tliat allegorical and mystical method of exposition, to which the luxuriant fancy, and the sublime imagery of the Athenian philo- sopher had given occasion, and the Platonic father was thus able to bring out of the simplicity of the Scriptures all the profoinid specu- lations vvhich he wished to find there. Origen is generally regarded as the father of scholastic theology, which derives its name from ap- plying the terms and distinctions of human science to the truths of revelation. Scholastic theology assumed different forms, correspond- ing to the succession of particular systems of philosophy. But during the whole period of its existence, it maintained this general charac- ter, that it altered and corrupted the divine simplicity of the gospel, and that by affecting metaphysical precision upon subjects which the Scriptures have let^t undefined, it was productive of endless contro- versies. The progress of these controversies, which rendered it necessary for the opposite parties to entrench their opinions behind definitions, divisions, and terms of art, recommended to theologians the philosophy of Aristotle. The subtile distinguishing genius of Aristotle had invented a language peculiarly fitted to convey the dis- criminating tenets of their systems, and his authority had introduced and established the syllogistical mode of reasoning, a mode of no avail in making discovery, but of singular use in disputation, because it furnishes a kind of defensive weapons, which, by keeping an oppo- nent at a distance, may, when skilfully managed, render it impossible for him to gain a victory. For these reasons, as well as for others, which it is not my province to explain, the Platonic philosophy yield- ed after a few centuries to the Peripatetic. The authority of Aristotle became as complete in the schools of theology as in those of logic or metaphysics; and all theological systems abounded so much with the barbarous jargon then in use, that we cannot at this day understand the opinions which were held upon intricate points of divinity without attempting to learn it. Upon all subjects this language served to con- ceal ignorance under an ostentatious parade of words. But when it is applied to those subjects which the wisdom of God hath seen meet to reveal in very imperfect measure, the number of clear ideas bears so very small a proportion to the multitude of words, that the study of it forms a very unprofitable waste of time ; for it requires mucli labour to apprehend the meaning, and, unless your mind be so un- happily constituted, as to remember words better than things, the meaning escapes almost as soon as it is attained. Since the era of the Reformation, the Aristotelian philosophy has been gradually sinking in the public esteem; and the human mind, having broken the fetters in which she had long been bound, has freely canvassed all subjects connected with religion. While the ablest writers have appeared during the two last centuries in the de- istical controversy, all the other controversies relating both to the doc- trine, and to the rites or discipline of the Christian church, have called forth men of profound erudition and of philosophical minds. The same causes which we formerly mentioned, have produced in modern times a difference of opinion, both with regard to those intricate questions in natural theology which the gospel has not solved, and THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 221 with regard to those new points, concerning which the information given in Scripture is by no means satisfying to the curiosity of man. A more rational criticism, than that used in ancient times, has been applied to the interpretation of Scripture. A more enhghtened phi- losoj^hy, a sounder logic, and a language less technical, but not defi- ciet]t in precision, have been employed in supporting the difterent theological opinions which former habits of thinking, or the interpre- tation of Scripture, have led men to adopt. The most controverted points have been the subject of public national disputes, as well as of private inquiry. Churches are discriminated from one another by the system upon those points which enters into their creed ; and indivi- dual members of every church, with that boldness of inquiry of which the Reformation set the example, have carried their researches into many points which most creeds had left undefined. The consequence of this thorough examination of the Scripture system has been, not that all the parts of it are understood, but that the measure in which they can be understood is known ; every unnecessary degree of ob- scurity which had been attached to them is removed, and the limits of reason in judging of religion, together with the proper method of its being applied to that subject, are ascertained. The opponents in these controversies have corrected the errors of one another. The appeals which have been constantly made to Scripture, the diligence with which all the passages relating to every subject have been col- lected, and the ingenuity with which they have been applied in sup- port of difierent systems, enable an impartial inquirer to attain the true meaning; and a student of divinity must be very much wanting to himself, if, after all the labours of those who have gone before him, he does not acquire a distinct notion of the various opinions that have been entertained concerning the several parts of the Scripture system, and an apprehension of the train of argument by which every one of them is supported. A review of the controversies forms a principal part of a course of theological lectures. We do not bring forward to the people all the variety of opinions which have been held by presumptuous inquirers, or superficial reasoners. To men who have not leisure to speculate upon religion, and who require the united force of all its doctrines to promote those practical purposes, which are of more essential import- ance than any other, it is much better to present " the form of sound words," as it was " once delivered to the saints," unembarrassed by human distinctions and oppositions of science, and to imprint upon their minds the consolation and" instruction in righteousness," which, when thus stated, it is well fitted to administer. This is the business of preaching. But this is not the only business of students in divinity. You are not masters of your profession, you are not qualified to defend the truth against the muUiplicity of error, and your conceptions of the system of theology have not that enlargement and accuracy which they might have, unless you study the controverted points of divinity. It is true that there have been many disputes merely verbal ; that there have been others that cannot be called verbal, the matter of which is wholly unimportant ; and that perhaps all have been con- duced with a degree of acrimony which the principles of Christian toleration, when thorouirhly understood, will enable you to avoid. 21* 222 CONTROVERSIES OCCASIONED BY These general remarks will find their proper place, after reviewing the particular controversies. But in that review you will meet with many which turn upon points so essential to the Christian faith, where the arguments upon both sides appear to have so much force, and have been urged in a manner so able, and so well fitted to enlighten the mind, that you will think it childish to affect to despise theological controversies in general, because there has been some impropriety in the manner of their being conducted, or because some of them are insignificant. The time was when the decision of all theological controversies turned upon a kind of traditional authority. The writers in the first four centuries of the Christian church were supposed to be much better acquainted with the mind of the apostles, and to have been in a more favourable situation for knowing the truth upon all difficult questions, than those who apply to the study of theology in later times. They were dignified with the name of the fathers. Their opinions were resorted to with a kind of reverence, which is not due to any human compositions. They were considered as the only sure interpreters of Scripture ; and such confidence was reposed in their interpretation, that their works were sometimes placed very nearly upon a level with the inspired writings. The charm of human authority was dispelled by the Reformation. An accurate enlight- ened criticism has appreciated the merit of the Christian fathers. We allow them all the credit, which is due to honest men attesting facts that came within their own knowledge. We venerate their antiquity ; we prize that knowledge of the early rites of the Christian church, and of the tradition of doctrine from the days of the apostles, which can be derived only from them. Above all, we consider their writings as an inestimable treasure upon this account, that by their mention of the books of the New Testament, and by the quotations from Scripture with which they abound, they are to us the vouchers of the authenticity of the sacred books, and of the manner in which the canon of Scripture was completed. But our sense of their merit, and of their importance to the Christian faith in the character of historians, does not induce us to submit to them as teachers. With- out any invidious detraction, with every indulgence which the manners of the times and the imperfections of other early writers demand for the Christian fathers, Protestants adhere to their leading principle, which is this, to consider the Scriptures as the only infalli- ble rule of faith. They have learned to call no man their master, because one is their Master, even Christ : and in interpreting the words of Christ and his apostles, they consider themselves as no less entitled to judge for themselves, and as, in some respects, no less qualified to form a sound judgment, than those who, living in earlier times, had prejudices and disadvantages from which we may be exempt. I cannot express this principle better than in the words of our Confession of Faith : " The Supreme Judge, by which all contro- versies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture." This is the principle to be followed in that review of the great con- THE SCRIPTURE SYSTEM. 223 troversies of religion, which forms a prominent subject of my lectures. I may often give you, from ancient writers, the history of opinions, and may occasionally combat those misrepresentations of that history which are found in modern authors, eager to call in every aid to sup- port their particular systems. But I shall quote the Christian fathers as historians, not as authorities. I know no authority upon which you ought to rest in judging of the truth of any doctrine but the Scrip- tures, and therefore I consider sacred criticism as the most important branch of the study of theology. We are to avail ourselves of an intimate acquaintance with the language of the New Testament, i. e. ■with the meaning of single words, with the usual acceptation of phrases, and with the real amount of figurative expression. We are to study the general customs of the people amongst whom that lan- guage was used, and the habits of thinking which might dictate a par- ticular phraseology to some writers. We are to investigate the mind of an author, by comparing his language in one place with that which occurs in another, and we are to endeavour to attain a full and pre- cise conception of the whole doctrine of Scripture upon every point, by laying together those passages of Scripture in which it is stated under ditferent views. It is by this patient exercise of reason and criticism that a student of divinity is emancipated from all subjection to the opinions of men, and led most certainly into the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. It is the great object of my lectures, to assist you in this exercise, and Imay hope, after having bestowed much pains in going before you, to be of some use in abridging your labour, by pointing out the shortest and most successful method of arriving at the conclusion. I shall not decline giving ray opinion upon the passages which I quote, and the comparison of Scripture which I shall often make. But I do not desire you to pay more regard to my opinions than to those of any other writer, unless in so far as they appear to you upon examination to be well founded. You will derive more benefit from canvassing what I say than from imbibing all that I can teach ; and the most useful lessons which you can learn from me are a habit of attention, a love of truth, and a spirit of inquiry. 224 AKRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. CHAPTER VII. ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. Our Shorter Catechism, and our Confession of Faith, are formed upon the course in which systems of divinity commonly proceed, and both of them are clear and well digested. You will find another ex- cellent abridgment of the ordinary course in Marckii Medulla Theolo- giae, a duodecimo of three hundred pages, which used to be the text book in St. Mary's College, and which, in my opinion, ought to be read by every student of divinity, not early, but before he finishes his studies. You will see in this little book all the controversies that have been agitated. But you will see them in the order of the sys- tem, and the order is this. After a general account of the nature of theology, and of the Scriptures as the principle of theology, the fol- lowing subjects succeed one another. God and the Trinity — the decrees of God — the execution of these decrees in the works of Crea- tion— a view of the visible and invisible world — the Providence and government which God exercises over his works — man — the state of innocence — the fall — the consequences of sin — the covenant of grace — the person, offices, and state of the Mediator of the covenant — the benefits of the covenant — the duties of those who partake of the benefits — the sacraments — the Church — the final condition of man- kind. Upon all these subjects, the orthodox doctrine is stated, and the objections that have been made to the several parts of the doctrine are answered, so that every chapter contains an account of the several opinions, that have been held upon all the points that occur in the chapter. I was afraid to entangle myself in this course, partly from an apprehension, proceeding both upon the number of subjects which it embraces, and upon the experience of other professors of divinity who have engaged in it, that it was likely to stretch out to such a length, as to leave me no hope of finishing my lectures during the longest term of attendance which the law prescribes to students ; and partly from an opinion that the arrangement adopted in the ordinary course is not the most perfect. You will not think this opinion ill founded, when you come to read Marckii Medulla ; for there, and I believe, in every other of the common systems, there is so close an alliance between the subjects treated under the different heads, that the same principles are frequently resorted to in order to illustrate the orthodox doctrine ; objections, the same in substance with those that had been answered in a former chapter, recur under a different form, and the same answers are repeated with only a little variation in the ARRANGEMENT OF THE COUKSE. 225 manner of applying them. I am very far from condemning this arrangement as in all respects improper. It was adopted by very able men ; it is most useful for giving a thorough acquaintance with all the parts of the Scripture system ; and there is one booJc in which it appears to such advantage, that what I account its imperfection is almost forgotten, I mean Calvin's Institutes of the Christian religion; a book written in Latin, that is not only perspicuous, but elegant, and giving a most masterly comprehensive view of the great points in theology. It consists of four books. The first is entitled, De Cogni- tione Dei Creatoris. The second, De Cognitione Dei Redemptoris. The third, De Modo Percipiendai Christi gratise, et qui fructus inde nobis proveniant, et qui effecfus consequantur. The fourth, De Ex- ternis Mediis ad Salutem. It requires much time to read this book carefully ; but when a student has leisure to make it his business, he will find his labour abundantly recompensed ; and I do not know a more useful book for a clergyman in the country. It may be pur- chased for a trifle, and it is the best body of divinity. But excellent and profitable as this book is, the imperfection which I mentioned adheres to the plan upon which it is composed ; and although the order of Calvin's Institutes appears to me simpler and more natural than that of any other system which I have read, yet I think that, if I were to attempt to follow it, I should be reminded by frequent repetitions, that a more perfect arrangement might have rendered the course shorter and less fatiguing. This impression led me to attend to another arrangement of the controversies, which has been executed with much ability by some theological writers. Every controversy is stated by itself; L e. all the distinguishing opinions of those, who derive a particular name from tlie peculiarity of their tenets, are brought into one view, and are referred to one general principle, so that you see the system of their creed, and can mark the connection between the several parts. To give an example : Socinianism is the system of those who hold the opinions of Socinus. The principle of Socinianism is, that man may be saved by that religion, which is founded upon the relation between God the Creator and man his creature. From this principle flow their opinions with regard to the intention of Christ's death as a witness to the truth, and an example to his followers, but not as an atonement for sin ; their exclusion of mysteries from religion ; and all those tenets by which they transform the Christian religion into the most perfect system of morality. The principle of Pelagianism, or of those who hold the opinions of Pelagius, is this, that the natural powers of man since the fall are sufficient to enable him to keep the law of God. From this principle flow the opinions of the Pelagians concerning original sin, the decrees of God, the influences of the Spirit, and the measure of perfection which may be attained upon earth. This metliod of arranging the controversies is manifestly much more scientific than the former. In every set of opinions which de- serves the name of a system, there are some leading principles which connect the several parts. It is an agreeable exercise of the under- standing to trace these principles, and to mark that kind of unity and subordination which arises from their influence. It is an act of jus- 21 226 ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. tice in those who examine the opinions of others, to take into view that mutual dependence which renders them a consistent whole ; and it is an endless unavailing task to attempt to defend the truth against a multitude of detached errors, unless your reasoning reach the sources from which these errors proceed. I recommend it, therefore, to those students who, in the course of their reading, have attained an intimate acquaintance both with the evidences of Christianity and with the particular doctrines of our faith, to study the most important controversies in this scientific manner. You will derive much assist- ance in this branch of your researches from Mosheim's Church His- tory, which is an invaluable treasure of theological knowledge. This most learned and ingenious author, who, when read along with the able and judicious notes of his translator Maclaine, is in almost every instance a safe guide, has given, in one division of his work, a sum- mary of all the heresies or particular opinions that were held in the dif- ferent ages of the church. He has traced their rise and their progress, and has discriminated, with critical acumen, those which appear to an ordinary eye almost the same. As his work, from its nature, makes mention of all the controversies, both those which are impor- tant and those which are trifling, you cannot expect that even the opinions upon which he has judged it proper to bestow the most par- ticular attention, will be fully elucidated in a book which comprehends such an extent of time, and such a variety of matter. You will sup- ply this unavoidable defect by the books which Mosheim quotes in his notes, or which I recommend : and from the general index which he furnishes, and the treatises which professedly explain the particu- lar subjects, you will be able to form a distinct connected view of every one of the five controversies which are universally interesting, and which are commonly known by the names of Arianism, Pelagi- anism, Socinianism, Arminianism, and the Popish controversy. There are many other controversies that turn upon very important points. But they have not been so perfectly digested into the form of a sys- tem as the five now mentioned, nor have they been defended with such ability as to occupy a great part of the attention of a student. Although I thus earnestly recommend attention to the scientifical arrangement of the controversies, I have been restrained from adopt- ing it as the plan of my course by the following reasons. Some of the five great controversies resemble one another in several points. Thus Pelagianism and Arminianism both turn upon the natural powers which man has, since the fall, to obey the will of God. So- cinianism agrees with Pelagianism upon this point, and it agrees with Arianism in denying that Jesus is truly God, while it ditfers from Arianism in the account which it gives of his person. You may judge from this specimen, that although the scientifical method, which I mentioned, is unquestionably the best for making you acquainted with any particular system of opinions, yet to us, v/lio mean to re- view ail the most important controverted points, it would necessarily be attended with much repetition. We should often meet, under ditfer- ent names, with the same objections, and the same heretical opinions, and we should be obliged to bring forward the same arguments and the same passages of Scripture in answer to them. Further, our object is not so much to know who held the particular opinions, and ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. 227 what was the age in which they hved ; but what were the various opinions upon the great subjects of theology, and what were the grounds upon which tliey rested. We may attain this object, although we confound the shades of difference between systems that nearly approach, and therefore to us it were a needless waste of research and of time to discriminate them nicely. Further still, as every one of the five great controversies embraces particular opinions upon many different points, the arranging the five separately breaks the subjects of theology into parts, and does not afford a full united view of any one subject. You will understand what I mean from an ex- amjile. Besides the opinions of the early ages concerning the person of Christ, one opinion was held in the third century by Arius, another at a much later period by Socinus, and a third has been the general doctrine of the Christian church. Any one wlio wishes to make him- self master of this interesting subject will desire to see the different opinions brought together, that he may compare their probability, that he may judge of the support which every one of them receives from particular passages of Scripture, or from the analogy of faith, and may thus attain a conclusion which he can defend by good rea- sons. Had you a book continually by you, in which all the contro- versies were arranged singly, you might make a collation of the different opinions upon the same subject, by reading first a part of Arianism, then the corresponding part of Socinianism, and next the corresponding part of that system which is called Orthodox, in the same manner as you get a full view of a siege in the Peloponnesian war, by passing directly from the portion of the siege which is writ- ten in one book of the history of Thucydides, to the portion of the same siege which is written in another book. But you could not make this collation in hearing a course of lectures, unless I repeated under one controversy as much of what I had said under the corres- ponding part of another, as to bring it to your mind ; and this repe- tition would be a proof that the arrangement, however favourable to your understanding any one system of opinions, is unfavourable to your understanding the whole controverted subject. Once more, there is in the different opinions upon the same subject a progress that may be traced, by which you see how one paved the way for the other ; and the succeeding opinion is often illustrated by the preparation which had been made for its reception. This advan- tage is lost, when you throw together the different subjects that were agitated in one system of opinions. You see, in this way, the chain which binds together all the parts of Pelagianism, Arminianism, or Socinianism. But in passing along the cliain, you miss the thread wliich conducts you from the opinions on a particular subject found under one system, to the opinions on the same subject found under another. For these reasons, I resolved neither to follow the path of the ordi- nary systems of theology, nor to adopt the more scientific mode of classing the opinions that distinguish different sects of Christians. The plan of my course is this : Out of the mass of matter that is found in the system, I select the great subjects which have agitated and divided the minds of those who profess to build their faith upon the same Scriptures. I consider 228 ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. every one of these subjects separately ; I present the wliole train and progress of opinions that have been held concerning it; and I state the grounds upon which they rest, passing slightly over those opinions which are now forgotten, or whose extravagance prevents any danger of their being revived, and dwelling upon those whose plausibility gave them at any time a general possession of the minds of men, or which still retain their influence and credit amongst some denomina- tions of Christians, In selecting the great subjects to be thus brought forward, I was guided by that general view of the Gospel which was formerly illus- trated. We found its distinguishing character to be the religion of sinners, — a remedy for the present state of moral evil, provided by the love of God the Father, brought into the world by Jesus Christ, and applied by the influences of the Spirit. All the controversies which are scattered through the ordinary systems, and which have been classed under the different heads, Arianism, Pelagian ism, Arminian- ism, and Socinianism, respect either the Persons by whom the remedy is brought and applied, or the remedy itself The different opinions respecting the Persons comprehend the whole of the Arian, a part of the Socinian, and all that is commonly called the Trinitarian contro- versy, upon which so much has been written since the beginning of the last century. The different opinions concerning the remedy itself respect either the nature of the remedy, the extent of the remedy, or the application of it ; and they comprehend the whole system of Pela- gian and Arminian principles, a part of the Socinian, and many of the doctrines of Popery. Opinions as to the nature of the remedy depend upon the apprehensions entertained of the nature of the disease ; so that all the questions concerning original sin, the demerit of sin, and the manner in which guilt can be expiated, fall under this head. Opinions as to the extent of the remedy embrace the questions concerning universal and particular redemption, and concerning the decrees of God. Opinions as to the application of the remedy turn upon the necessity of divine assistance, the manner in which it is bestowed and received, and the effects which it produces upon the mind and the conduct of those to whom it is given. It appears to me, therefore, that by this distribution we do not omit any of the great controversies, with which students of divinity ought to be acquainted: at the same time, by tracing with undistracted attention the progress of opinions upon every subject, by viewing their points of opposition, and examining their respective merits, we consider one subject closely upon all sides before we proceed to another, and are thus saved the necessity of returning at any future , period upon the ground which we had formerly trodden. Much light v/ill probably be struck from this collision of different opinions. You have experience that you are never so thoroughly acquainted with a subject, as when you have heard the discussion of the several qiies- - tions to which it gives rise, either in conversation, or in more formal debate ; and therefore you have reason to expect that your knowledge of theology will be rendered much more accurate and profound, by canvassing the different opinions held in a succession of ages by very able men, and defended by them with a zeal that cannot be supposed ARRANGEMENT OP THE COURSE. 229 to have omitted any argument, because it was dictated not merely by the love of (ruth, but in many instances by the desire of victory. After I have derived all the benefit which the labours of these men can aftbrd, in oi)onii)g to you those doctrines of Christianity which are the great subject of your studies, I next consider the church of Christ jis a society founded by its Author. This branch of our course entered into the general view of the Scripture system ; and it demands your particular attention, not only from the mention made of it in Scripture, but also from the many violent controversies to which it has given birth. The notion of a society implies the use of certaiu external observances, wliich are necessary to distinguish it from other societies, and to maintain order amongst the members. It is natural, therefore, in speaking of the Christian society, to give a history of church government, or an account of the various practices and ques- tions which have occurred upon this head ; and in tliis account I am led to investigate the grounds of that claim advanced by the Bishop of Rome, as the head of the church, and the Vicar of Christ upon earth. There are many of the doctrines of the church of Rome, which fall under some of the controversies that we propose to review. But these doctrines were only called in as auxiUaries of the hierarchy, to lend their aid in supporting that system of spiritual power, of which the claim made by the Bishop of Rome was the principal pillar ; so that by much the greater part of the Popish controversy belongs to the head of church government. It is impossible, in this country, to consider Church government without bestowing attention upon the claims of Episcopacy and Pres- bytery. After examining the support which they derive from the word of God, and from the practice of antiquity, the transition is natural to the constitution of that Church, of which you expect to become members. The Church of Scotland, like every other established Church, requires her office-bearers to subscribe a declara- tion of their faith. It is proper, therefore, to consider the right upon which such requisition rests, and the propriety of that right being exercised. The peculiar doctrines contained in that declaration, which we call the Confession of Faith, will have passed in review before we come to this part of our course. But it will be proper that you then attend to the reason of the peculiarities of that worship, in which you may soon be called to preside, and to the principles of that discipline and government, of which you may soon be called to be the guardians and the administrators. The different parts of the office of a parish minister are familiar to those who live in this country, where they are not neglected. But some observations, with regard to the importance of performing them properly, and the manner in which they may be rendered most use- ful, will not appear unseasonable to those who are about to enter upon the office of the ministry ; and there is one branch of that office, I mean the preparation and the delivery of sermons, concerning which, after all that you have heard of composition elsewhere, you will naturally expect some practical rules in a place where your own discourses, the legal specimen of your proficiency in the study of theology, are exhibited and judged. When I have filled up this plan to my own satisfaction, I shall think 22 230 ARRANGEMENT OF THE COURSE. that I discharge that part of the public duties of my station which consists in lecturing, by contributing the wliole stock of my informa- tion and experience for your advantage. My principle is, to con- dense the execution of the plan as much as possible. I shall be disappointed, if I be not able to comprise my whole course in such a period as will give to every residing student of divinity an opportu- nity, if he chooses, of hearing all the parts of it ; and I shall think it an advantage, if, by omitting some parts, and abridging others, I can so reduce the course, as to admit of passing over it twice, in the time prescribed for regular attendance at college. Turretin, abridged by Russenius, is a very useful book for giving a short view of all the controverted points. Stapferi Instit. Theol. Polemicae, in 5 vols, is a valuable work. The different systems of opinions concerning the truths of religion are there separately arranged. BOOK III. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SON, THE SPIRIT, AND THE MANNER OF THEIR BEING UNITED WITH THE FATHER. ^ The Gospel reveals two persons, whose existence was not known \>Y the light of nature ; the Son, by whom the remedy offered in the Gospel was brought into the world, and the Spirit, by whom it is applied. The revelation concerning the first of these persons is much more full than that concerning the second, and has given occasion to a greater variety of opinions. I shall begin therefore with stating the opinions concerning the Son ; I shall next give a short view of the opinions concerning the Spirit ; after which, there will remain a general subject, arising, as we shall find, out of the illustration of these separate branches ; and, in speaking of this, I shall have to state the opinions respecting the manner in which these two persons are united with the Father. CHAPTER I. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE PERSON OF THE SON. In entering upon the opinions concerning the person of the Son, I must warn you not to consider the subject as unimportant. It is the language of Dr. Priestley, that the value of the Gospel does not, in any degree,.depend upon the idea which we may entertain concerning the person of Christ, because all that is truly interesting to us, is the object of his mission, and the authority with which his doctrine is promulgated. But this language is inconsistent with the general strain of the New Testament, a great part of which we shall find occupied in giving us just conceptions of the person of Christ: It is inconsistent with the general sentiments of the Christian Church, who liave canvassed this subject with much diligence, and with deep interest, ever since the Gospel appeared : It is inconsistent with th« zeal which Dr. Priestley and his associates have discovered in com- 231 232 - OPINIONS CONCERNING THE municating their opinions upon this subject to the world ; and it is inconsistent with the natural propensity to which the Scriptures have graciously accommodated themselves, and by which every one is led to connect the importance of a message with the dignity of the messenger. It does not become any one to suppose, that the discover- ies made in the gospel concerning the person of Christ contain merely a popular argument, to which it is unnecessary for him to attend. But it becomes every person, who believes that the message proceeds from heaven, to receive with reverence the discoveries concerning the messenger, as conveying important truth, which claims the attention of every understanding to which it is made known, and creates duties which a Christian ought not to neglect. With this impression of the importance of the subject, I proceed to analyse the opinions concerning the Person of Christ. I do not pro- pose to follow the order of time, because there is some difficulty in ascertaining the dates of particular opinions, because the order in which they arose is not always very material, and because the frequent revival of old opinions in new systems would render a chro- nology of them full of repetitions. Neither do I propose to fatigue your attention with the useless uninteresting detail of all the extrava- gant conceits broached by particular men, or of the minute shades of difference among those who agreed in their general system. I shall furnish you with the information that is of real importance, by bring- ing forward the three great systems upon this subject. Their features are strongly marked and clearly discriminated, and they appear to comprehend all the variety of which the subject admits, because the several opinions which have at some times been exploded and at other times revived, are always reducible to one or other of these three systems. The simplest opinion concerning the person of Christ is, that he was merely a man who had no existence before he was born of Mary ; who was distinguished from the former messengers of lieaven, not by any thing more sacred in his original character, but by the virtues of his life, and by the extraordinary powers with which, upon account of the peculiar importance of his commission, he was invested ; who, after he had executed this commission with fidelity, with fortitude, and zeal, was rewarded for his obedience to God, his good-will to men, and his patience under suffering, by being raised from the dead, and exalted to the highest honour, being con- stituted at his resurrection the Lord of the creation, and entering at that time into a kingdom which is to continue to the end of the world, and the administration of which entitles him to reverence and sub- mission from the human race. Some who held this general system admitted that Jesus was born in a miraculous manner of a virgin ; while others contended that he was literally the son of Joseph and Mary. Some said that Jesus might be worshipped upon account of the dominion to which he is raised ; while others, who allow that gratitude and honour are due to him, confine adoration to the Father. But these two differences do not affect the general principle of the system. In whatsoever manner Jesus came into the world, he is, according to this system, 4-^7^0; w^^wrtoj, a mere man ; and whether reve- rence in general, or that particular expression of reverence that is PERSON OF THE SON. 233 called adoration, be considered as due to him, it is not npon account of any essential property of his nature, but upon account of a domi- nion that was given him by God. The grounds upon which this opinion rests, are the general strain of the prophecies of the Old Testament, in which Jesus is foretold as the seed of the woman ; the general strain of the New Testament in which our Lord speaks of himself, and his apostles speak of him as a man ; the accounts of his birth, his childhood, his sufferings, and his giving up the ghost ; and the manner in which tlie Scriptures frequently state his glory as the recompense of what he did upon earth. The argument drawn from this language of Scripture is supported by general reasonings concerning the fitness of employing a man, whose life is a pattern which we may be supposed capable of imitating, and whose resurrection and exaltation furnish an encourage- ment, suited to the condition of those who encounter hardships the same in kind with those which he overcame : and this argument is defended by attempts to explain away such passages of Scripture, as seem to contradict the system, and particularly by referring every thing that is said of the glory of Christ to that power which was given him upon earth, or to that state of exaltation which he now holds in .heaven. It is said that this opinion was held in the first century by a small sect of Jewish converts, called the Ebionites, who received no other part of the canon of the New Testament but the Gospel according to JNIatthew, after rejecting the first two chapters. The opinion \vas openly taught by Theodotus and Artemon, about the end of the second century : and Eusebius says that Theodotus was the first who taught the simple humanity of Christ.* It may be traced also in other systems that divided the Christian church before the Coimcil of Nice, which met in the beginning of the fourth century. But after that Council, this opinion appears to have been exploded till the time of the Reformation, when it was revived by Socinus, and propagated among his disciples, who abounded in Transylvania, Hungary, and Poland. It continues to form one of the leading characteristical featiu'es of those who are called Socinians. It was insinuated with modesty and diffidence by some eminent men in the course of the last century, amongst whom is Lardner, who has deserved so well of the Christian world by that laborious and valuable collection entitled the Credibility of the Gospel History. It has of late been published with zeal and confidence by Lindsey, Priestley, and tlieir associates ; and it is the avowed principle of those Socinians who choose to dis- tinguish themselves by the title of Unitarians. The second opinion concerning the person of Christ, is, that he was not a mere man, but that he existed before he appeared upon earth. It occurs to mention under this second opinion one branch of the tenets of the Gnostics, those heretics who began, even in the days of the apostles, to corrupt the simplicity of the gospel by a mixture of oriental philo- sophy. They held that the Christ was an emanation from the supreme mind, one of those beings whom they considered as filling the pleroma, and to Avhom they gave the name of yEous. This * Eus. Hist. Ecc. lib. v. 22* 2 K 234 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE glorious ^on, who was sent by the Supreme Being to the earth, according to some of the Gnostics, united himself to the man Jesus at his baptism, and left him at his crucifixion ; according to others, he only assumed the appearance of a man ; so that the body which the Jews saw, and which they thought they crucified, was a shadowy form that eluded their malice. Hence this latter class of Gnostics were called by the ancient fathers, Docetas, from Soxw, videor, as they ascribed a seeming, not a real body to Jesus. It were endless to fol- low all the differences of opinion concerning the person of Christ among those who held the Gnostic principles ; because as the princi- ples were merely the fruit of imagination, resting upon no solid ground either in reason or in revelation, they admitted of infinite variety. A sounder philosophy has exploded these abuses of fancy, and given human speculations a more useful direction, so that the whole system of Gnostic principles is now an object of study, only in so far as some acquaintance with it is necessary to throw light upon those parts of the sacred writings in which it is attacked. Mosheim has delineated that system in his Church History with great ingenuity and learning, with more minuteness in some instances, than it appears to deserve, and with as much precision and clearness as its obscure airy form admitted. You will learn from him all that needs to be known upon this subject; and you will find that almost all the Gnostic sects considered Jesus as dignified and animated by some kind of union with a celestial NaQW, who had existed in the pleroma before he descended to earth.* It is of more importance to fix your attention upon the substantial definite form which the second opinion concerning the person of Christ, I mean that which raised him above man by ascribing to him pre-existence, assumed in the system of Arius. It was the lead- ing principle of this system, that the Christ, the first and most exalted of the creatures of God, existed before the rest were created, and is not like any thing else that was made. I call this the charac- teristical principle of Arianism ; because, whatever traces of it some have pretended to discover in more ancient writers, Arius is univer- sally allowed to be the first who taught it systematically; and this principle was the opinion for which he was condemned by the council of Nice in the beginning of the fourth century. The writings of Arius, in which he unfolded and defended his system, were burnt by the authority which condemned his opinions. But a few of his epistles, the creed which he gave in to Constantine, and the sentence pronounced against him by the council of Nice, are extant ; from a comparison of which, a candid inquirer may attain a clear concep- tion of the outlines of his system. His system was this — the one Eternal God, the source of all being and power, did, in the beginning, before any thing was made, produce by his own will a most perfect Creature, to whom he communicated a large measure of glory and power. By this Creature, God made the worlds, all things that are in heaven and that are in earth, so that he alone proceeded immediately from God, while all other creatures not only existed after him, but were called into being by his instrumentality, and placed by the • Mosheim's Eccles. Hist, Cent. II. Part II. ch. V. PERSON OF THE SON. 235 Father under his administration. Having been the Creator of the first man, he was from the beginning the medium of all divine com- munication with the human race. He appeared to the patriarchs; he spake by the prophets, and in the fulness of time he was incarnate, i. e. clothed with that body, which, by the immediate oj^eration of God, was formed out of the Virgin Mary : and thus, according to the Arian system, the man Christ Jesus had a real body, like his brethren. But that body, instead of being animated by a human soul, was in- formed by the super-angelical spirit, who had been with God from the beginning, who condescended to leave that glory, partook in the sorrow and agony which filled up the life of Jesus, and in recompense of this humiliation and obedience, was exalted to be the Saviour, the Sovereign and the Judge of mankind. Arius professed to have received this faith from the gospel, and to hold the sense of the Scriptures ; and he might suppose that his system reconciled those passages which speak of the dignity and eternity of the Son of God, with those which seem to imply an inferiority to the Father. It appeared to him, that this first creature, upon account of the super-eminent- glory and power communicated to him, might without impropriety be called the only begotten Son of God, and God ; and he admitted that this Creature was in one sense eternal, because he proceeded from God before the existence of those measures of time, which arise from the motion and succession of created objects. He thought himself at liberty, therefore, to hold this language in his creed, " We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, and in his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was made by him, begotten before all ages, God the word, by whom all things were made in heaven and in earth." But although all these expressions, except one, '• who was made by him," might have been used by those who held the received opinions, there were three points in his system which were condemned by the council. He said of the Son, »?«' rcots ite ovx r^v—n^iv ytwrjerjtut ovx *iv — and 4 ovx ov-rwv tytvcto. The meaning of the three points upon which he was condemned was this. Although Arius carried back the existence of the Son before all worlds, and so before all times, 3^et it was possible, according to his system, to conceive some point from whence that existence commenced. The Son had no existence till the act of the Father produced him, and he was produced, not out of the substance of the Father, but like other creatures, out of nothing. We suffer persecution, says Arius in one of his epistles, because we have said, the Son hath a beginning, but God hath no beginning, and because we have asserted that the Son is out of nothing.* This opinion was opposed by the authority of successive councils, and by the decrees of the Roman Emperors, who had by this time embraced Christianity, and those by whom it was avowed were exposed to contumely and barbarity. Before the end of the fourth century it was extirpated in the greater part of the Roman empire, and appears to have been so much forgotten, that all the Divines who wrote upon this subject after that period till the Reformation, were almost wholly employed, not in explaining or combating the Arian system, but in proposing different modifications of that which I am to state as the • K. \. apud Epipb, H. 69. N. vl 236 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE tliird opinion concRrning the person of Christ. The opinion of Arius revived in the seventeenth centnry,-\vhen the progress of the Refor- mation allowed greater hberty in rehgious speculation ; and, although it be contrary, not only to the confessions of the established churches of Great Britain, but to the laws of the land, it has appeared with little disguise in many able treatises, and was held with certain quali- fications, by some of the most eminent divines in the last century. The third opinion concerning the person of Christ is, that from all eternity he was God. Neither the Socinians nor the Arians deny that the name of God is ascribed to him. But as, according to their systems, the only foundation of that name is the degree of glory and dominion with which he was invested at an earlier, or a later period, and as the same will, which thus freely distinguished him above the other creatures, may remove the distinction when the purposes of it are accomplished, it is manifestly implied in these systems, that Christ has a dependence upon the will of another, and a possibility of change, which require that the word God, when applied to the Son, be under- stood in a sense very diflerent from that in which it is applied to Him who from everlasting to everlasting is God. Although therefore the three opinions coincide in the use of the same name, the third is essentially distinguished from the second as well as from the first in this point, that according to it Christ eternally and necessarily co-ex- isted with God. All the perfections of the divine nature belong to him essentially; no past time can be conceived in which he did not possess them, and no time shall arrive hereafter in which any of them can be separated from him. There has been much controversy whether this was the general opinion of the Christian church before the council of Nice. Petavius, a learned Jesuit, in his immense work, entitled Dogmata Theologica, has laboured to show, that the leathers of the first three centuries in- clined to Arianism, and have in many places spoken of Christ as an inferior God. Bishop Bull, who wrote in the seventeenth century, and is by much the ablest defender of this third opinion, has rendered it, in my opinion, more than probable that Petavius gives a false representation of those who are called the Ante-Nicene Fathers, and that, although upon many occasions they expressed themselves loosely and inaccurately, yet it was the constant opinion of the most respect- able writers in the first three centuries, that Christ was from eternity God. But the truth is, this controversy concerning the opinion of the Ante-Nicene Fathers has derived more importance from the labour and zeal with which it has been agitated than it deserves. For the question does not depend upon human authority ; and in whatever manner ancient writers have expressed themselves upon this subject, the truth remains the same. Even although Dr. Priestley could estab- lish the position which he has maintained in other smaller treatises, and in a great work of four octavo volumes, entitled, the Histoiy of Early Opinions concerning the person of Christ, that the Christian church from the earliest times was in general what he calls Unitarian, and that the Godhead of the Son, in the proper sense of the word, was unknown to the great body of Christians, and is found only occasionally mentioned in the works of a few authors; still the mat- ter rests upon its original ground, and the question recurs, which of PERSON OF THE SON. 237 the three opinions concerning the person of Christ is most agreeable to the revelation made in Scripture upon that subject. We derive from the study of the ancient Christian writers the history of the pro- gress of theological opinions: we may learn the manner in which very able men, who bestowed their whole attention upon theological subjects, illustrated and defended the opinions which they held, and we may tlius be assisted in understanding the truth, and directed where to find the proper arguments in support of it. But these argu- ments must ultimately be drawn from Scripture, and Dr. Clarke, however persons may differ as to the merits of his system, of which I shall have occasion to speak afterwards, must be allowed to have suggested the only proper method of attaining the Scripture doctrine of the Trinity, by collecting all the texts in which there is any men- tion of that doctrine. You will understand, then, that when at any time I quote the sayings of ancient or respectable Christian writers, I quote them as evidences of what their opinion was, not as proofs that that opinion was true ; and you will agree with me in thinking, that I should very much misspend your time, if I entered into a minute investigation of those passages in their works which appear to be contradictory, and followed the labours of many modern authors in thus endeavouring to ascertain what were the sentiments of Tertullian, Eusebius, or Origen. But while we disclaim every kind of submission to the authority of the Fathers, there are expressions which recur frequently in their writings so marked and significant, that they deserve to be brought forward, as they may assist you in understanding what the third opinion concerning the person of Christ truly is. The Ante-Nicene Fathers often speak of the kindling of one light by another, as the image which most fitly expresses the generation of the Son from the Father, because in this case tliere is no separation or difference of kind. The original light remains undiminished, and that which is kindled appears to be the same. They say, that as the sun in the heavens cannot exist without emitting light, as no interval can be conceived between the existence of the sun and the emission of his rays, so Clirist always existed with God ; and they argue the eternity of Christ from his being the wisdom, the reason, what the Greek writers called the ?^oyoj of the Father. The words of Athanasius, the great antagonist of Arius, are these, o wr ©soj. f| ivtov xm ovta tov %ayov f^n* xtu ovtt b >.oyo$ c rt i.y e y 01' I v, ovx u>v rt^ott^oi', ovti o rta'trj^ aT-oyoj t^v rtots.* The meaning of these, and other similitudes, with which the Ante-Nicene Fathers abound, was precisely ascertained by that word which the council of Nice adopted in opposition to the opinion of Arius. They said that the Son is o;tto8atoj with the Father. This word the Arians could not, in consistency with their principles, admit into their confes- sion. They held that the Son was produced immediately by the Father out of nothing. But they saw that, if he be of the same substance with God, he is God, and that if he is God, he cannot have a temporary precarious existence, but must have always been with the Father what he now is. This word therefore became the mark of distinction between the second and the third opinions concerning • Athanas. Orat. passim. 23S OPINIONS CONCERNING THE the person of Christ, and the precise amount of ouofwj when applied to the Son, is this, that although it be impHed in the name of the Son, that he proceeded from the Father, and ahhough, in reference to his proceeding from God, he be called the only begotten of the Father, yet the essential glory and perfections of the Father and the Son are the same. It is further to be stated, that while the Socinians believed the Christ to be a mere man, in whom an extraordinary measure of the power of God dwelt, while the Arians believed that the Christ was composed of a super-angelical spirit, and a human body, those who hold the third opinion believe that Christ assumed, at the incarnation, the complete human nature into union with the divine ; in other words, that the body of Christ was animated by a human soul, and this soul was so united with the Godhead that the divine and human nature formed one person. I enter not at present into the grounds of this third opinion. I mean only to state what it is, and in order to assist your apprehension of both parts of it, I shall recite to you a part of the Nicene Creed, by which this third opinion was more clearly defined than it had been before, and those parts of the confessions of the two established churches in Britain, by which it appears that both of them have adopted the third opinion concerning the person of Christ. The words of the Nicene Creed, translated literally from the Greek, are these: "We believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, that is to say, of the substance of the Father, God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made both in heaven and in earth, Avho for us men, and for our salvation, came down, and was incar- nate, being made man." The second of the thirty-nine articles of the church of England is in these words : " The Son, which is the word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, of her substance, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the godhead and manhood, were joined together in one person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God and very man." The words of our Confession of Faith are : " The Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father, did, when the fulness of time was come, take upon him man's nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance, so that two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and the Manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person; without conversion, com- position or confusion, which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ." PERSOX OF CHRIST, 239 CHAPTER II. SIMPLEST OPINION CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST. Having stated the three opinions concerning the person of Christ, to which all others may be reduced, I proceed to compare the grounds upon which they rest. And here I must begin with observing, that general reasonings con- cerning the probability of any of these opinions, or its apparent suita- bleness to the end of Christ's manifestation, ought not to enter into this comparison. Ingenious men have said plausible things in the way of general reasoning in support of all the three. It may to some appear difficult to balance one of the speculations against the other, because men will be inclined to give a preference according to the complexion of their understanding, and their former habits of thinking. But you will be satisfied that such reasonings are of little or no weight in the scale of evidence, when you recollect how soon they lead us beyond our depth. Probability in this subject depends upon a multi- tude of circumstances, which are not within the sphere of our obser- vation. Fitness or expediency in this subject depends upon the order and the designs of that universal government of which we see only a part. The fact, that Jesus Christ appeared in the land of Jndea the teacher of a new religion, could not have been investigated by reason, but like all other facts is received upon credible testimony. The par- ticular character and dignity of this person therefore, is a matter of revelation to be gathered from the books that inform us of his appearance ; and the only solid ground of any opinion concerning his character is a right interpretation of the books in which it is described. After we have attained by sound criticism the information which is thus afforded us, reason may. be employed in vindicating the opinion which that information warrants us to hold, in bringing forward those views of its expediency which revelation enables us to assign, and in balancing the difficulties which may adhere to it, against those diffi- culties and objections which appear to attend other opinions not taught by Scripture. Reasoning comes here in its proper place to support our faith, by being opposed to other reasonings that attempt to shake it, and to rescue the opinion that is delivered in the word of God from the charge of absurdity. But we profess to learn the opinion from the Scriptures ; and we hold it with firmness, because it is revealed. This general observation suggests the plan upon which I mean to proceed in comparing the grounds of the three opinions. 1 defer all speculations concerning them, till we have learned what the Scrip- 240 SIMPLEST OPINION CONCERNING tures teach. I begin with the simplest propositions, advancing, as the information of Scripture leads us, to those which are farther removed from ordinary apprehension ; and in this way, I shall not arrive at the most intricate parts of the subject, till our minds are established in the belief of those facts which ought to guide our rea- sonings. This patient method of proceeding is not the most favour- able to disputation upon this subject •, it is not the best calculated for lecturing upon it in a showy amusing manner ; but it appears to me that in which I ought to persevere, as the only method becoming our distance, and the certain method of attaining truth. The simplest opinion concerning the person of Christ is, that he was merely a man, ■"V'^oja^e^urtoj; and the advocates of this opinion rest it upon numberless passages of Scripture, upon a solution of those declarations concerning Christ, which appear to be inconsistent with their opinion, and upon the insuperable difficulties in which they represent all other opinions as involved. I lay aside at present all consideration of these difficulties, because I consider every specula- tion concerning them, as calculated to create a prejudice either for or against the evidence that is to be examined ; and I direct your atten- tion only to the Scripture grounds upon which this opinion is rested, and the declarations of Scripture by which it is opposed. I take the Scripture grounds of this opinion from a book published about the year 1773 by Mr. Lindsey, who gave the world a pledge of his honesty, by resigning his preferment in the Church of England, because he held this opinion. The following arguments and testi- monies, he says, will abundantly show that Christ was a man like ourselves, saving those extraordinary gifts of divine wisdom and power by which he was distinguished from the rest of mankind. 1. The prophecies that went before concerning Christ speak of him as a man, — the seed of the woman; the seed of Abraham ; a prophet like to Moses ; the son of David. 2. In consequence of these predictions, the Jews in all times have expected the Messiah to be a man. " Hath not the Scripture said," observe the people in the gospel of John, " that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was ?" 3. Christ's appearance in the' world ; his birth ; his increase in wisdom and stature ; and the visible circumstances of his condition answered to the prophecies concerning him that he was to be a man. 4. Christ continually spake of himself as a man, the son of man being the phrase by which he commonly designed himself; and the son of God, the title which he sometimes assumed, admitting of an interpretation which does not contradict his being a man. 5. John, his forerunner, calls him a man. And, 6. The four evangelists show by their narration that they took him to be a man ; and in the other books of the New Testament he is often so designed. The testimonies which Mr. Lindsey has collected under these heads* prove that Christ was truly a man ; they undoubtedly convey an im- pression that he was a man in all respects like us; and, if they con- tained the whole doctrine of Scripture concerning the nature and per- son of Christ, the first opinion would claim to be received upon the * Sequel to Apology, by Theophilus Lindsey, ch. 7. THE PERSON OP CHRIST. 241 highest possible evidence. But Mr. Lindsey is aware that there arc passages in Scripture which appear to contradict this opinion. Like all those who have agreed with him in opinion, he attempts to give a solution of them ; and the point that must be considered is, whether there are declarations in Scripture of such a kind, as to efface the im- pression made by the testimonies collected under the six heads now mentioned, and to show that the first opinion rests upon a partial view of Scripture. 23 2L 242 PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. CHAPTER III. PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. The philosophy which you have learned has completely exploded the fanciful doctrine of some ancient sects, that the souls of men existed before they animated those bodies with which we behold them connected. You know that this doctrine supposes a fact, which is no where revealed, which is not vouched by human testimony, which is not supported by any solid argument, and is contradicted by the principle of consciousness. You believe that the souls of men began to exist with their bodies ; and, although you cannot explain the time or the manner of the union between these two companions, you never ascribe to the being of the man any date more ancient than the first formation of his body. If then there be evidence that Christ had a being before he was conceived of the Virgin Mary, he cannot be a man like us. He may be truly a man with all the essential pro- perties of human nature, so that there is no impropriety in ascribing to him the name of man, or the Son of Man. But the opinion of those who consider him as i^^^oj avO^cortoj, nothing more than man, must be false. Accordingly all those who hold the second and third opinions, oppose to the Socinian system one simple position, viz. there is evidence from Scripture of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. This position is sufficient to overturn the first opinion, and it is necessary to lay a foundation for the second and third. For, although it does not fol- low from the pre-existence of Christ, either that he is the most exalted creature in the universe, or that he is God, yet, if he did not exist before he was born of Mary, he cannot be either the one or the other. A position which contradicts the first opinion, and which is assumed in the other two, seems to be the proper point from which to set out in examining the three opinions concerning the person of Christ. Un- less you are satisfied of the truth of this position, you will not be dis- posed to give yourselves much tronble in canvassing the second and third opinions. But if you find evidence, that by his pre-existence he is more than man, it will be natural to proceed to inquire how far he is exalted above man, whether he is a creature of a higher rank, or whether he be entirely exempted from the order of creatures. In examining this position, I shall first bring forward those pas- sages of Scripture, which teach plainly that our Saviour did pre-exist ; and I shall next direct your attention to those passages, which ascribe to him different actions in his state of pre-existence. From the first set of passages, I do not mean to derive any thing more than simply PRE-ExrSTENCE OP JESUS. 243 a proof of the pre-existence of Jesus ; but, in attending to the second, we shall unavoidably be led by the descriptions of those actions which are ascribed to Christ, to consider his original character and dignity, and we shall thus pass naturally from the proofs of his pre- existence to the proofs of a higher point, to those passages, upon a right interpretation of which turns the decision of the question be- tween the second and third opinions. I shall at present bring forward only those passages of Scripture which teach plainly that our Saviour existed before he was born of JNIary ; and, in reviewing them, I shall lay before you those solutions of their meaning which are given by the more early or the later Socinian writers, that you may judge how far it is easy to reconcile them with the opinion of our Lord's being 41:^.05 a^o^urtoj. You will recollect a language which runs through a great part of the New Testament, that " God sent Jesus into the world," that Jesus " came in the flesh," " was made flesh," " was made a little lower than the angels," "took part of flesh and blood." Now, this language is greatly wanting in propriety and significancy, if Jesus began to exist at that time when he is said to have come in the flesh ; whereas the expressions recited are the very manner in which it is necessary to speak of his becoming a man, if he had an existence be- forehand. A language which thus implies that Jesus existed before he was born of Mary, being found in numberless places, may be con- sidered as meant to correct the inference which might otherwise be drawn from the phraseology of Scripture, in which he is spoken of as a man. At the same time you will not consider this implication as the proper ground upon which to rest so important a conclusion. We derive the knowledge of the pre-existence of Jesus from explicit declarations of Scripture, and, having in this way attained assurance of the fact, we find the general phraseology of Scripture so contrived as to reconcile this fact with his being truly a man. These explicit declarations were made by John the Baptist, by our Lord himself, and by his Apostles. 1. John the Baptist bore witness of Jesus in these words. Jo. i. 15, 30. "After me cometh a man, which is preferred before me, for he was before mo," n^uto^ ^w r^v. You would expect ^gorfgoj instead of rtswtoj. But there are many instances in the best Greek writers of a similar construction, vl^x^ -a nt^ffwi/ n^i^tov Ttavti^v Aa^aov, is an expres- sion used by Aristophanes ;* and if tie,^noi t^v, first, when compared with me, be equivalent to n^ott^o^ juou, there seems to be here a plain declaration of the pre-existence of Jesus. The Socinian interpretation is, " the Christ, who is to begin his ministry after me, has by the divine appointment been preferred before me, because he is my chief or principal, n^t^toatafr^i ^ov, and I am only his servant." But Bishop Pearson, on the second article of the creed, has well observed, that according to this interpretation a thing is made the reason of itself. He is preferred before me, because he is my chief; whereas if ^^wroj (lovrv be considered as expressive of time, not of dignity, it contains a reason for the former clause. He who was born a few months after me, and whose ministry begins after mine, has been placed before me, • Aristoph. O^nStj, lin. 484. 244 PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. has a higher station assigned him in the economy of that dispensation which is now opening, because lie had an existence before me. It is true that the three other evangelists make John the Baptist say, " He that cometh after me is mightier than I." i^xv^otf^oi i^.ov. But you will perceive, when you compare the four, that the phrase is equivalent to f,u7t^o^0£v fiov, " is preferred before me," not to rtQoto^ ^ov. For the speech in the other three consists only of one clause ; and John, who, writing after the others, has supplied many things that were wanting in them, added the words utc n^oitoi fA-ov rjv. He has used the same expression in another place of his gospel, where it must denote time. If the world hate you, says Jesus to his disciples, ycvusxBts 6tt, sfie t^utov in^v ^sfinjrixs. Yon will obscrvc too, that if the phrase had had the uncommon remote meaning which the Socinians affix to it, instead of rtc^rojj^j/, it should iiave been Ti^i^ro^ soti,. For unless Jesus pre- existed, he was not the chief of John till he entered upon his ministry, the beginning of which John was only announcing. Lardner, aware probably of the force of the objections made by Bishop Pearson, has given another interpretation of these words, which some of the modern Socinians consider as probably expressing the meaning still more truly. " He that cometh after me has always been before me, or in my view, i. e. present to mj?- mind as the object of my continual ex- pectation and reverence ; for he was my superior." I leave you to judge, whether it is likely that the hearers of John would affix either the latter or the former Socinian meaning to his words, and whether a declaration, which he repeats frequently as his witness to the Messiah, is not to be understood according to the plain obvious sense given in our translation. John iii. 31. "He that cometh from above is above all : he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth : he that cometh from heaven is above all." John is making a comparison between himself and Jesus. " He must increase, but I must decrease." The 31st verse states a distinction, not merely in respect of dignity, but in respect of origin and extraction ; and the heavenly extraction of Jesus is introduced as the ground of his superior dignity. I have called your attention to this passage, because it appears to me to be the answer to a sophism which is frequent in the modern Socinian writers. When such expressions, as Jesus being sent from God and coming from heaven, are urged in proof of his pre-existence, they uniformly answer, that these expressions mean nothing more than that he received a divine commission. " For," they say, " John also is called a man sent from God ; and our Lord, upon one occasion, asked the chief priests, the baptism of John, was it from heaven, or was it from men? he meant was it of divine or of human institutioil ; and it was the same thing, whether he had asked did John come from heaven, or was his baptism from heaven ?" But the words of John Baptist in this place show, that he understood there would have been an essential diffijrence between the two questions. He asserts in other places, that he was sent by God to baptize with water ; and therefore his baptism might be said to be from heaven. But here he admits that he himself was of earth, whereas the person to whom he bore witness was from heaven. Their commission had the same authority ; for both were sent by God. But the one was a man who PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. 245 received this commission after he was born : the other was a Being who, having existed before in heaven, came from heaven, and was made man, that he might execnte his commission. John iii. 13. "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." These words appear to contain a declaration that the Son of man came down from heaven. But, in order to elude the force of this declaration, two ditferent expositions have been given. The one was the exposition of Socinus and his immediate followers ; the other is adopted by the modern Socinians. The first is this : " It is very probable, and agreeable to the words of Scripture, that Christ, between the time of his birth, and his entering upon the office of Messiah, was translated by God to heaven, and remained there some time, that he might see and hear those things which he was to publish to the world. As Moses, who is acknowledged to be a type of Jesus, was forty days on the mount with God, and brought from thence the two tables of the law, and the pattern of all things pertaining to the worship of God, so it was most fit that Jesus should go up to heaven, of which Sinai was a type ; and it is probable that the time of our Lord's temptation, when he is said to have been forty days in the wilderness, was the time of his being admitted to converse with God in heaven." According to this exposition our Lord says to Nicodemus, no man hath ascended up to heaven, to learn these heavenly things which I have to tell yon, but he who came down from heaven, after he was instructed in them, even the Son of man, who ivas — rendering wi' the imperfect participle, who was in heaven. This exposition was employed to solve all those passages where we read of Christ's coming from heaven, proceeding from the Father, being sent by God. But you will observe, that there is no other proof of the fact upon which this exposition proceeds but this single circumstance, that it is possi- ble, in this way, to explain such passages as these, without supposing the pre-existence of Jesus. His translation to heaven is admitted without evidence, in order to exclude his pre-existence. I say with- out evidence. For although it would have been most honourable for a man to be thus admitted to converse with God in heaven, although, according to the Socinian system, it is of the utmost importance to the followers of Jesus to have this assurance, that the words spoken by a man like themselves, are truly the words of God, there is not any one passage in the New Testament which plainly declares, or even by certain niference implies, that he was translated to heaven. Other circumstances are mentioned in the short accounts that are given us of that part of his life which elapsed before he appeared preaching the Gospel. But this fact, in comparison of which most of tliem are msignificant, is passed over in silence by all the evangelists. The modern Socinians have abandoned an exposition thus resting upon a conjecture, which is not only destitute of evidence, but is con- tradicted by the silence of the historians. And they have adopted another exposition, founded upon the figurative language which abounds in Scripture. In our way of apprehension, they say, a man that would be acquainted with the secrets of the divine will should go to heaven to converse with God. Accordingly it is said by Moses: " The commandment whicli I command thee this day is not in 23* 246 PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. heaven, that thou shouldest say, who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it and do it."* But if ascending to heaven easily signifies being admitted to the knowledge of the divine counsels, coming down from heaven may signify being authorized to reveal it to men ; and being in heaven, or in the bosom of the Father, means no more than being highly favoured of God, and made acquainted with his counsels. The declaration of Jesus to Nicodemus, therefore, does not necessarily imply a literal ascent and descent ; but, when stripped of the metaphorical language in which it is clothed, it amounts merely to this — He alone was admitted to an intimate know- ledge of the will of God, and authorized to reveal it to men. This exposition is much more plausible than the former ; and it is agreeable to that interpretation which we are often obliged to give to figurative language. But you will observe that the language in this passage is not figurative •, the words are perfectly simple ; there is no obvious necessity for departing from that sense which is agreeable to the plain construction of them ; and if a liberty is allowed of consider- mg plain language as figurative, in order to give it a meaning very remote, and evade a doctrine which it seems clearly to teach, there can be no certainty in the declarations of Scripture. You will observe also, that according to this exposition there is a tautology in the words, which is both ungraceful and unmeaning. No man hath known the divine counsels but he who has a commission to declare them, even the Son of man, who is intimately acquainted with them. On the other hand, if you understand the second clause, according to the literal import of the words, and according to many other declarations of the New Testament, to denote a real descent from heaven, then the first and third clauses are clearly distinguished. If you consider <^v as the imperfect participle,the third clause means, the Son of man who was in heaven before he descended. If you consider w as the present participle, you give the third clause a meaning which cannot be reconciled with the Socinian system, but which is adopted by our translators in opposition to that system ; the Son of Man, who, being according to the views communicated in other passages of Scripture both God and man, is in heaven while he now dwells upon earth. There is an apparent difficulty in the clause, " No man hath ascended up to heaven but the Son of Man ;" for we know that Elijah did ascend, and our Lord had not ascended when he spake these words. But attention to the context enables us, without doing violence to the words, by an accommodation to circumstances which is easy and obvious, to remove that difficulty. Our Lord had been stating to Nicodemus some of the doctrines of the Christian religion, at which this master of Israel is stumbled, saying, " How can these thhigs be ?" Our Lord answers in words most expressive of the dignity of his character, and the entire credit to which he was entitled. " We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen. If I have told ycu earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things?" i. e. There are doctrines more sublime and heavenly than these at which you are stumbled. My doctrine, according to the expression of Moses with which you are well • Deut. XXX. 11, 12. ' PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. ^ 247 acquainted, may be said to be in heaven ; and you can learn it from none but me, for no person has ascended to heaven for the purpose of bringing it from thence, « m'?' unless you choose to apply that expression to the person, who, having been in heaven, came down from it. He is better qualified to instruct you in heavenly things, than if he had ascended for the purpose of bringing them down. John vi. 62. " What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before.-"' The ancient and the modern Socinians explain aAvay this declaration, in the same manner as that which we have now been considering. One of their latest commentaries is in these words : — " When you shall see me go up to heaven to God, where I was before," i. e. from whom I have received my instructions and authority, " you will then understand the language which I now hold with you." As this declaration of the pre-existence of Jesus is simpler and less embarrassed with other circumstances than that in the tliird chapter, so the context necessarily leads us to reject the Socinian paraphrase, and to understand the words in their obvious sense. Onr Lord had been holding a long discourse with the Jews, in which he spoke of himself as the "bread of life that came down from heaven.^' The Jews understood this to be an assertion of his having been in heaven, and they opposed to it their knowledge of his birth, " Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know ? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven." Our Lord, in answer to their murmurings, repeats and enforces his former assertion ; and, after he had left the synagogue, understanding from his disciples that they also were offended at this hard saying, he says to them, " Doth this offend you ? what and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before ;" i. e. to heaven, of which he had been speaking. The expression implies a literal ascent to heaven, which was to be an object of sense, ^n^^^iti ; and the intima- tion of this glorious event, which was to remove all their doubts and their offence, is conjoined with a repetition in simple language of that assertion at which they had been offended. The Evangelist had told us the sense which the Jews affixed to that assertion : the complaint of the disciples implies that they affixed the same sense to it ; and we cannot suppose that they were mistaken, because this private declaration of our Lord, where I was before, is expressly calculated to confirm them in the mistake. You have our Lord, therefore, in this sixth chapter of John, holding both in the synagogue of the Jews, and in a confidential intercourse with the disciples, such a language as his hearers understood to mean that he was in heaven, before they saw him upon earth, John viii, 58. " Before Abraham was, I am." The old Socinian interpretation was : — " I exist before that Patriarch has become, ac- cording to the import of the name Abraham, the Father of many nations ; for that name is to receive its fulfilment by the preaching of my religion, in which all the nations of the earth are to be blessed through the seed of Abraham." But this is saying nothing ; for the Jews, to whom our Lord is speaking, existed also before this event: I am, and ye all are, before the Patriarch becomes Abraham in this sense. The modern Socinian interpretation is not more plausible. « Before Abraham was born, I am he ;" i. e. the Christ, in the des- 248 PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. tination and appointment of God. My commission as INIessiah was fixed and determined by the Almighty, before Abraham had a being. But this is saying nothing pecuhar to the Messiah ; for known to God are all his works. The existence and the circumstances of the meanest creatures were as much fore-ordained as those of the highest angel. The natural meaning of the words is, that Christ had a being before the bijth of Abraham. n^ivyBviadMexswov is a common classical phrase for, before his birth : and although fy» rjv might rather have been expected, as he is speaking of existence in a past time, yet the present tense does affirm existence ; and there is a reason for this pe- culiar mode of expression which will occur afterwards. This obvious interpretation of the words is very much confirmed by the circum- stances in which they were spoken. Our Lord had said, " Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad," The Jews understood from this expression that he had seen Abraham, that is, they understood him to affirm that he existed in Abraham's day ; and they answered, " Thou art not fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham ?" Our Lord had not said that he had seen Abraham, but, because it was true, lie does not disavow it ; and he confirms the conclusion which they had drawn from his former saying, by declar- ing expressly that he existed not only in the time, but before the birth of Abraham. " Before Abraham was, I am." They did not mis- take his meaning; but they were filled with indignation at the pre- sumption which his words appeared to them to discover ; and " they took up stones to cast at him." Other texts, as John xvi. 28, John xiii. 3, 1 Cor. xv. 47, 2 Cor. viii. 9, also teach the pre-existence of Jesus. To assist you in understanding the principles of that solution, by which the Socinians endeavour to evade the force of the plainest de- clarations concerning the pre-existence of Jesus, I shall give a parti- cular account of the manner in which they explain John xvii. 5. " And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine ownself, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." Jesus appears in this place to declare explicitly, and at a most solemn time, when he " lift up his eyes to heaven," and in the hearing of his disciples prayed to God immediately before he went out to the garden where he was betrayed, that he had glory with the Father before the world was : and it is very remarkable that he introduces the mention of this glory, when it was not necessary to complete the sense of any pro- position ; for he is praying that God would glorify him. And yet, as if on purpose to prevent the apostles who heard the prayer from supposing that he was asking that which he had not possessed in any former period, he adds, " with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." To a plain reader it would seem, that, if Jesus never had any such glory, these words, uttered in such circumstances, discover the highest presumption and impiety. But, observe the Socinian exposition : " The glory for which Jesus prays is something posterior to his sufferings ; yet he speaks of it in the 22d and 24th verses as already given him, tt;vBo^avtr!viiA.*jv^i>s6u,xaitfi(K. He had not at this time received it ; but the Father had promised it. And since the promise of God can never fail, he considers it as fully his own as if he had been in possession of it. In the same manner he says he PRE-EXI5TENCE OF JESUS. 249 had glory with God before the world was ; not that he had really- been in possession of it before the world was, but because it was then destined for him by God. God is said to have ' ciiosen us before the foundation of the world ;' and the kingdom of heaven is said to be prepared for us from the beginning of the world, although we had then no being. And so Christ says that God loved him, and that he had glory with God before he had a being. And the glory for which he prays is not his own private advancement, but the success of that gospel by which the virtue and happiness of mankind were to be promoted. This had been his sole aim, for which he had lived, and for which he was about to die. And now, at the approach of death, he says, I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, 0 Father, complete thine own work in the happy beneficial consequences of my death, and speedy restoration to life, as in thine all-wise eternal purpose thou hast decreed." These are the most exalted sentiments which can be conceived to animate a human breast : and I doubt not you feel, as I have often felt, that admiration of these sentiments creates a kind of prejudice in favour of that inter- pretation, which supposes them to be uttered, in the most trying scenes, by a mere man. But we should recollect that there are many occasions in which the influence of the principle of admiration makes us overlook the simplicity of truth ; and that the excellence of an ob- ject is then really known, not when it is magnified by your imagina- tions in a particular light, but when its whole nature is considered. The Scriptures, by teaching clearly the pre-existence of Jesus, by representing him as acting at all times under a consciousness of his original dignity, and an assurance of his exaltation, do not leave room forthat enigmatical exposition of the words of this prayer, by which his sentiments at the close of his life are assimilated to the heroism of mortals. The expressions which he uses, according to the plain sense of them, are becoming him who knew whence he came and whither he was going ; and, if they do not present us with an extraordinary effort of mere human virtue in the Son of man, they present us with a worthier object of our faith and hope, the Son of God, who had been made man returning to his Father. Before I leave those passages which teach the pre-existence of Jesus, it is proper to speak of a title, the true meaning of which is intimately connected with this subject. One of the grounds of the Socinian opinion, I said, is this, that Jesus commonly designs himself the Son of man, and that the other title, the Son of God, which he sometimes assumes, admits of an interpretation not inconsistent with his being a mere man. This interpretation the Socinians derive from different passages of Scripture, where Jesus is styled the Son of God, for reasons that have no connexion with his existence in a previous state. The first is his miraculous conception. The angel said to Mary, « The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee ; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee," i. e. begotten of thee, " shall be called the Son of God." The second is the distinguished commission which he re- ceived as Messiah, and the honour conferred upon him. For, in the language of the New Testament, the Christ, or Messiah, and the Son of God, are used as equivalent interchangeable terms. " We believe," 2 M 250 PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS. said the disciples, " that thou art the Christ, the Son of the Uving God." The High Priest asked Jesus at his trial, " Art thou the Son of the blessed ?" and John concludes his gospel with saying, " These things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is tlie Christ, the Son of God." There is still a third reason upon account of which Jesus is called in Scripture the Son of God, and that is his resurrec- tion. For Paul says, Acts xiii. 33, " God hath fulfilled the promise which was made unto the fathers, in that he hath raised up Jesus again, as it is also written in the second psalm. Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee :" and he says in his Epistle to the Romans, " Jesus was declared to be the Son of God with power, by the resurrection from the dead." It appears undeniably from these passages that there is an intimate connection in the language of Scrip- ture between this title, the Son of God, and these three circumstances, the miraculous conception, the office, and the resurrection of Jesus. But none of these three necessarily imply that he existed in a pre- vious state ; and, therefore, it appears to me, that although it be natural to form the most exalted conceptions of a person called the Son of God, yet, if no other premises were given us, we should not be warranted to infer the pre-existence of Jesus from his bearing that name. You must first establish, by other evidence, that he did pre- exist, and then you infer from his being called the Son of God, that the meaning of that name is not exhausted by his miraculous concep- tion, his office, and his resurrection, but that it serves farther to intimate the manner of his pre-existence. This reasoning would be fair and conclusive, if our Lord were called simply the Son of God. But its conclusiveness appears more manifest, when you consider those dis- criminating epithets which are joined to this name. God is our father by creation, and by the grace of the Gospel, and they who partake of that grace are often called his sons. But Jesus Christ is styled his own Son, the Son of his love, his beloved Son in whom he is well pleased ; and in the Gospels and Epistles of John, the only begotten Son of God ; all which imply, that the highest meaning of this title belongs to Jesus. It has been said that the phrase, only begotten Son, which is peculiar to John, means nothing more than beloved. But these two phrases are not synonymous amongst men. A child may be only begotten without being beloved, and he may be beloved without being only begotten. It is irreverent to suppose that so sig- nificant a phrase would be employed by John upon such a subject, in a sense so inferior to its natural import. And it is known that the Christians, from the earliest times, adopted in their creeds this phrase, his only begotten Son, or his only Son, as distinguishing Jesus from every other son of God. Now, you will observe, that although the name of the Son of God is connected in Scripture with the miraculous conception of Jesus, his office, and his resurrection, none of these three come up to the mean- ing of this phrase, the only Son of God. Not his miraculous con- ception,— he was indeed conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost. But Adam also is called the Son of God ; and unless you deny that Jesus was truly the son of Mary, you must admit that there was in this respect still greater propriety in giving the name of the Son of God to a person, who, being formed without father or mother out PRE-EXISTENCK OF JESUS. . 251 of the dust of the earth, was still more immediately the workmanship of God. — Not his office as Messiah ; for many special messengers had been sent by God to men in former times. In allusion to them, Jesus is often styled a prophet, a messenger, the sent of God. But the mark of distinction between him and them, which some propiiecies of the Old Testament announce, and which the books of the New Testament often express, is this, that he is the Son of God, his only begotten Son; words which have no meaning, if they refer purely to that commission which he received in common with others, and which are always so introduced as to lead our thoughts to a character which he had before he received the commission. Neither does the resur- rection of Jesus come up to the meaning of the phrase, the only be- gotten Son of God. He was indeed brought by the Father out of the bowels of the earth. But we are taught that all who are in their graves shall rise ; and he himself hath said that they who are accounted worthy to obtain the world to come, are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection, vioii(,a(,tov@sov,Tr;iC).vaaTarjtuivlovov'iii. Ac- cording to the views given in Scripture, Jesus is the first that rose from the dead never to die any more, and the resurrection of good men is the effect of his. He is thus, in respect of his resurrection, the first among many brethren. " Every one in his own order, Christ the first fruits ; afterwards they that are Christ's." His resurrection was indeed the demonstration, that that name which he had taken to himself during his life did really belong to him ; and therefore it is said, he "was declared to be the Son of God with power by his resurrection." But to say that his resurrection made him the Son of God, is to confound the evidence of a thing with the thing itself These few remarks may satisfy you, that neither the miraculous conception of Jesus, nor his office, nor his resurrection, contains the full import of this name, the only begotten Son of God. But (here is a more ancient and a more exalted title to this name, which is inseparable from his nature. I enter not at present into the various and intricate speculations to which this subject has given occasion. We shall be better prepared afterwards for touching them slightly. I meant only, by connecting the mention of this name with those passages which teach the pre-existence of Jesus, to make you bear in your minds during the progress of our researches, that the peculiar reasons of a name which you will find uniformly appropriated to Jesus, are to be sought for not in the history of his appearance upon earth, but in those passages which contain the revelation of his pre-existent state. 252 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS CHAPTER IV. ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. Creation. Having drawn from explicit declarations of Scripture sufficient evidence that Jesus existed before he was born of Mary, I am next to direct your attention to those passages which ascribe to him differ- ent actions in his pre-existent state. The nature of the actions, and the manner in which they are narrated, will unavoidably lead us to form some conception of the character and dignity which belonged to Jesus before he appeared upon earth ; so that, if this branch of the examination shall confirm the belief of the pre-existence of Jesus, it will not only destroy the first opinion, but will assist us in comparing the grounds upon which the second and third opinions rest. As no action in which we have any concern can be more ancient than creation, it is natural to begin with those passages in which creation is ascribed to Jesus. The Apostle Paul says, Eph. iii. 9, " God, who created all things by Jesus Christ." But as the last words. Si iri6ov Xgtarov, are not found in the most ancient MSS. and were not quoted by any of the Christian writers before the Council of Nice, it is conjectured by Mill, in whose valuable edition of the Greek Testament all the various readings are collected, that these words were first written in the margin, as a commentary suggested by expressions in the other epistles, and were afterwards adopted by the transcribers of the New Testament into the text. The conjecture appears plausible, and the most zealous defender of the pre-existence of Jesus need not hesitate to subscribe to it : for our faith in this im- portant article, that he is the Creator of the world, does by no means rest upon this incidental expression, which, supposing that it was not originally written by the apostle, would never have obtained a place in the text, had it not been literally derived from the more full decla- rations contained in other passages of Scripture. These full declarations are found in the beginning of the gospel of John, in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. All the three appear to teach, explicitly and particularly, that Jesus is the Creator of the world. Yet they have received different interpretations, of which you ought not to be ignorant ; and your being able to deduce with certainty that which we account the true meaning of the words, and to defend it against the objections by which it has been attacked, IN HIS PRE-EXISTEXT STATE. 253 depends upon the knowledge of circumstances which form so essen- tial a branch of your studies, that I think it my duty to give a parti- cular elucidation of these three passages. Section I. John i. 1 — 18. You will begin with observing the steps by which the apostle pro- ceeds in enunciating his meaning. The first five verses do not of themselves mark out the person to whom they apply. It would seem that a person is intended : For time, sv a^xv place, ^CJ ^"^ ®^°*'^ Jind action, rtavta 8i avtov lyivsio, are ascribed to o Aoyoj. But the name is not clear enough to mark out who he is. In the 6th verse there is the proper name of a man, iwawj^j. And it appears from the sequel of the chapter, that this Wvrjjj is the person whom we are accustomed to call John the Baptist. It is said of this l^awr]?, in the 7th verse, ovtoi tixdiv £15 fto^rv^taK, Iva jxa^tv^i^ny] rtsQi tov ^torof. The article defines the word 1>wT'o5. and leads you back to a light already spoken of, and consequent- ly supposed to be known to the reader; i. e. the light mentioned in the 4th verse, which, from the construction, is unquestionably the same with o 7.oyo{. Ec avr^, i, e. ^oycfi, fuj^ tjv, xat ^ ^w^ r,v to i tu>v av9Qi07tiov. It is said in the 5th versa that this light appears ; and the 7th verse establishes a connexion between the appearance of the light and the appearance of John, for he came to bear witness of it, 8th verse, ovK. riv ixiivoi to ^toj, oxy^ au na^tv^t]nv] jii^t tov fioto^. The time of this shining of the light must have been posterior to the appearance of John, and the manner of the shining must have been explained by his words, otherwise his testimony could not have been of any use in making men believe. But John the Baptist was the contemporary and the countryman of the writer of this gospel. He died, indeed, at an early period of life. Still, however, many of the persons into whose hands this gospel came, might know perfectly, either from their own recollec- tion, or from what they had heard others report, the general purport of John's testimony, so as to be directed by his words in applying the expression of the evangelist. Those who knew what John the Bap- tist had said, could not fail to know what was the fo ifwj of which he came to bear witness. It is farther stated, that the person who had been called in the first five verses, o ^oyo?, and ro^wj, was an inhabitant of earth at the time of John's appearance ; for you read in the 10th verse, svti^ xon^iu r^v — 14th verse, eOm-iau.tSa.t7iv Sotav a.vtov. And this glory which was beheld, was not a celestial transietit glory, dazzling the sight of mortals like a meteor, and quickly hid in clouds ; for o xoyo< ea^i tyivito, xm laxi^vurav tv y-fiw. It appeared in a bodily substantial form. The person who has been called oxoyo?, pitched his tent, dwelt for some time amongst men, and while the glory which they beheld impressed them with a notion of his dignity, he engaged their affec- tions by the grace of his manners ; for he was rtxt^^rjt x<^'^oi xMaxr^Onai. Here are limiting circumstances so peculiar in their nature, that they 24 254 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS cannot apply to any other inhabitant of earth in the days of John Baptist but that extraordinary personage, whose memory was fresh in the minds of his countrymen when this gospel was written, and whose name is expressly mentioned in the 17th verse, Ijjotvj x^wroj. It deserves particular notice, that with all that simplicity of manner which distinguishes the writer of this gospel, he has inserted this name in such a way as to make it the explication of all that had gone before. He had said in the 14th verse, o ^yoy aa^l sytvsto- xm eaxrivioasv tv ^^cv, (xac (Oeaoaixcda ttjv 6o|av avtov, 6o|ai' wj juocoyscouj rta^a, rtar^oj,) rtT^j^gj/j a^a^troj xm axy;9Ha;. Here he applies to o jcoyoj, the person of whom he had been speaking from the beginning of the chapter, two phrases, ^l■ovoysvr;i, and ?t7ij;^»75 ;t*?'*'oj "at axj^ettaj : and in the 17th verse he introduces the name, itjwv? x^iotoi, after the repetition of one of these phrases, and before the repetition of the other, manifestly connecting the name with both the phrases. It appears, then, from this general analysis of these eighteen verses, that this evangelist must be not merely a most incon- sequential writer, but a writer who purposely and artificially misleads his readers, unless the person who is called o J^yoj in the first verse be the same who is called Ij^otvj XgKjtoj in the 17th, that is, unless the whole of this passage be applicable to Jesus Christ. But if the whole be applicable to him, we have the testimony of an apostle, that all things were made by him. navta 6c aurou sysvi-to' xac A^o^tj avT'ou tysvBio ovSe tv 6 ysyovf. I have chosen to lead you in this manner to the knowledge of the person meant by o xoyo^ because the fairest way of interpreting a passage is to lay the whole of it together, and so bring the sense of an author out of his words. But it is natural to inquire, why did John use this dark expression ? Why has he begun his gospel in such a manner as to require this circuitous method of arriving at his mean- ing ? Would it not have been better to have said plainly. In the beginning was Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ was with God, and Jesus Christ was God ? In answer to this question, you will recollect that many of those modes of expression in ancient writers, which appear hurtful to perspicuity, were dictated by some circumstances peculiar to the country, or the times in which the writers lived ; and that the obscu- rity, in which to us such expressions seem to be involved, is removed by the knowledge of those circumstances which rendered them the most proper and significant when they were used. There has been much dispute what were the circumstances that led John to use this expression, o xoyo?. The subject is involved in considerable obscurity from our imperfect knowledge of the dates of particular tenets. But I shall endeavour to give, in a short compass, the result of a very fatiguing examination of the dispute. Before the days of our Saviour, there were Targums, i. e. Chaldee paraphrases of the Old Testament, for the use of the vulgar Jews, who, upon their return from tlie Babylonish captivity, did not under- stand the original Hebrew, As these Targums Avere composed by the learned men of the nation, and portions of them were read every Sabbath-day in the Synagogues, they may be considered as the national interpretation of the Jewish Scriptures ; and they have often been quoted by those who have entered deeply into the argument IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 255 from prophecy, as the vouchers of the sense which the Jews affixed to their own predictions before the days of our Saviour. Tlicse Targums, in almost every place whore Jehovah is mentioned in the Hebrew as talking with men, assisting them, or holding any imme- diate intercourse with them, have used tliis circumlocution, the word of Jehovah. In the Hebrew, Jehovah created man in his own image ; in the Targum, the word of Jehovah created man. In the Hebrew, Adam and Eve heard the voice of the Lord God ; in the Targum, they heard the voice of the word of the Lord God. In the Hebrew, Jehovah thy God, he it is that goeth before thee ; in the Targum, Jehovah thy God, his word goeth before thee. Those who are qualified to judge of this matter say that all the personal charac- ters of action are ascribed in the Targums to the Word ; and that there are places where the sense renders it impossible to understand the word of Jehovah as merely an idiom of the language equivalent to Jehovah. Thus in the Hebrew it is, God came to Abimelech ; in the Targum, his word came from the face of God to Abimelech. And the 110th Psalm is thus paraphrased. Jehovah said to his Word, sit thou at my right hand. We cannot suppose that this mode of expres- sion would have been introduced into the Targums, at the time when they were composed, had it then appeared a novelty ; and there is no doubt that, by the weekly reading of the paraphrases, it would become familiar to the ears of the Jews. Accordingly, in the Wisdom of Solomon, a book which is understood to have been written a hundred years before Christ, we meet with the following expression, referring to the judgment upon the land of Egypt : " Thine almighty word leaped down from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, and brought thine unfeign- ed commandment as a sharp sword, and standing up, filled all things with death, and it touched the heavens, but it stood upon the earth."* This may appear to you only a bold expressive figure for the divine energy which was exerted in the punishment of the Egyptians, in the same manner as that passage in Psalm xxxiii. " Ey the word of the Lord were the heavens made," does not necessarily convey to a mind accustomed to weigh the import of language any thing more than that the heavens were made by the Lord. But there appears the best reason for thinking that the constant use of this circumlocution cherish- ed in the minds of the body of the Jews the belief that there was a person distinct from the Father whose name was the word of Jehovah ; and it is certain that Philo, a learned Jew, bred at Alexan- dria, who lived about the time of our Saviour, whose books were published before his death, speaks in numberless places of the xoyo?, whom he calls a second God, the Son of God, the image of God, the instrument by whom God made the worlds. Philo did not learn this word in the Platonic school ; for although ^oyo^ occurs often in the writing of the later Platonists, who lived in the second and third centuries, there is no evidence that Plato, or any of his disciples before Philo, used >j»y% as the name of a person distinct from God. It is doubted by Mosheim, whether Philo himself beheved that there was a distinction ; and that indefatigable inquirer has brought together, in * Wisdom of Solomon, xviii. 15, 16. 256 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS his notes upon Cud worth, several passages which appear to rae to make it probable that Philo, Uke many other philosophers, had an esoteric and an exoteric, a secret and an ostensible doctrine. His secret doctrine was, that v/hat his countrymen called ^-oyoj was nothing else but the conception formed in the mind of God of the work which he was to execute, and that what they accounted a distinction of persons was ideal and nominal, accommodated to the narrowness of our apprehension. But if this was truly his private sentiment, his calling the ^oyoi the Son of God, and a second God, is a proof that the opinion concerning the Word of Jehovah as a person, had so firm a possession of the minds of his countrymen, that he did not wish to offend them by teaching openly and unequivocally a doctrine opposite to that which they had derived from Scripture and tradition. Not long after the writings of Philo were published, there arose the Gnostics, a sect, or rather a multitude of sects, who having learnt in the same Alexandrian school to blend the principles of oriental philosophy with the doctrine of Plato, formed a system most repug- nant to the simplicity of Christian faith. It is this system which Paul so often attacks under the name of " false philosophy, strifes of words, endless genealogies, science falsely so called." The foundation of the Gnostic system was the intrinsic and incorrigible depravity of matter. Upon this principle they made a total separation between the spiritual and the material world. Accounting it impossible to educe out of matters any thing which was good, they held that the Supreme Being, who presided over the innumerable spirits that were emanations from himself, did not make this earth, but that a spirit of an inferior nature very far removed in character as well as in rank from the Supreme Being, formed matter into that order which constitutes the world, and gave life to the different creatures that inhabit the earth. They held that this Inferior Spirit was the Ruler of the creatures whom he had made, and they considered men, whose souls he imprisoned in earthly taber- nacles, as experiencing under his dominion the misery which neces- sarily arose from their connexion with matter, and as estranged from the knowledge of the true God. Most of the later sects of the Gnos- tics rejected every part of the Jewish law, because the books of Moses give a view of the creation inconsistent with their system. But some of the earlier sects, consisting of Alexandrian Jews, incorporated a respect for the law with the principles of their system. They con- sidered the Old Testament dispensation as granted by the 5>?fttoi)^Xoj, the Maker and Ruler of the world, who was incapable, from his want of power, of dehvering those who received it from the thraldom of mat- ter : and they looked for a more glorious messenger, whom the com- passion of the Supreme Being was to send for the purpose of eman- cipating the human race. Those Gnostics who embraced Christianity, regarded the Christ as this Messenger, an exalted ^on, who, being in some manner united to the man Jesus, put an end to the dominion of the 5>7,wiou^yoj, and restored the souls of men to communion with God. It was natural for the Christian Gnostics who had received a Jewish education to follow the steps of Philo, and the general sense of their countrymen, in giving the name J^oyoj to the Srjficov^yoi ; and as X^Mfoj was understood from the beginning of our Lord's ministry to be the Greek word equivalent to the Jewish name Messiah, there 1 IN HIS PKE-EXISTENT STATE. 257 came to be, in their system, a direct opposition between X^t^foj and ^oyo{. Aoyoj was the maker of the world : x^iafoj was the iEon sent to destroy the tyranny of ?-oyoj. One of the first teachers of this system was Cerinthus. We have not any particular account of all the branches of his system : and it is possible that we may ascribe to him some of those tenets by which later sects of Gnostics were discriminated. But we have authority for saying that the general principle of the Gnostic scheme was openly taught by Cerinthus before the publication of the Gospel of John. The authority is that of Irena3us, a bishop who lived in the second century, who in his youth had heard Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John, and who retained the discourses of Polycarp in his memory till his death. There are yet extant of the works of Irenseus, five books which he wrote against heresies, one of the most authentic and valuable monuments of theological erudition. In one place of that work he says, that Cerinthus taught in Asia that the world was not made by the Supreme God, but by a certain power very separate and far removed from the Sovereign of the Universe, and ignorant of his nature.* In another place, he says, that John the Apostle wished, by his Gospel, to extirpate the error which had been spread among men by Cerinthus ;i and Jerome, who lived in the fourth cen- tury, says that John wrote his gospel, at the desire of the Bishops of Asia, against Cerinthus and other heretics, and chiefly against the doc- trines of the Ebionites, then springing up, who said, that Christ did not exist before he was born of Mary .J From laying these accounts together, it appears to have been the tradition of the Christian Church, that John, who lived to a great age, and who resided at Ephesus, in pro-consular Asia, was moved by the growth of the Gnostic heresies, and by the solicitations of the Chris- tian teachers, to bear his testimony to the truth in writing, and parti- cularly to recollect those discourses and actions of our Lord, which might furnish the clearest refutation of the persons who denied his pre-existence. This tradition is a key to a great part of his gospel. INIatthew, Mark, and Luke, had given a detail of those actions of Jesus which are the evidences of his divine mission : of those events in his life upon earth which are most interesting to the human race ; and of those moral discourses in which the wisdom, the grace, and the sanctity of the Teacher, shine with united lustre. Their whole narration implies that Jesus was more than man. But as it is distinguished by a beautiful simplicity which adds very much to their credit as historians, they have not, with the exception of a few incidental expressions, formally stated the conclusion that Jesus was more than man, but have left the Christian world to draw it for them- selves from the facts narrated, or to receive it by the teaching and the writings of the Apostles. John, who was preserved by God to see this conclusion, which had been drawn by the great body of Christians, and had been established in the Epistles, denied by differ- ent heretics, brings forward, in the form of a history of Jesus, a view of his exalted character, and draws our attention particularly to the * Iren. contra Hisr, lib. iii. cap. ■xi. 1. + Id. lib. i. xxvi. 1. + Jerome De Vit. Illust. cap. ix. 24* 2 N 258 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS / truth of that which had been denied. When you come to analyze the gospel of John, you will find that the first eighteen verses contain the positions laid down by the Apostle, in order to meet the errors of Cerinthus ; that these positions, which are merely affirmed in the introduction, are proved in the progress of the gospel, by the testimony of John the i5aptist,and by the words and the actions of our Lord ; and that after the proof is concluded by the declaration of Thomas, who, upon being convinced that Jesus had risen, said to him, " my Lord, and my God," John sums up the amount of his gospel in these few words : " These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," i. e. that Jesus and the Christ are not distinct persons, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The Apostle does not condescend to mention the name of Cerinthus, because that would have preserved, as long as the world lasts, the memory of a name which might otherwise be forgotten. But although there is dignity and propriety in omitting the mention of his name, it was necessary, in laying down the positions that were to meet his errors, to adopt some of his words, because the Christians of those days could not so readily have applied the doctrine of the Apostle to the refuta- tion of those heresies which Cerinthus was spreading among them, if they had not found in the exposition of that doctrine some of the terms in which the heresy was delivered : and as the chief of these terms, %oyoi, which Cerinthus applied to an inferior spirit, was equiva- lent to a phrase in common use among the Jews, the word of Jehovah, and was probably borrowed from thence, John, by his use of xr^oj, rescues it from the degraded use of Cerinthus, and restores it to a sense corresponding to the dignity of the Jewish phrase. You will perceive from this induction the fitness with which the Apostle John introduces this word xoyoj, although it had not been used by the other Evangelists who wrote before the errors of Cerinthus. You may think it strange that xoyo?, which is announced with snch solemnity at the beginning, does not occur again in this gospel. But the reason is suggested by the introduction itself John has said in the 14th verse, 6 ?ioyo; (501^1 fyf^ro, and he has inserted Jesus Christ in the 17th verse as the name of the man who was the Word made flesh. Our Lord was "^oyo^ in the beginning. But during his ministry upon earth, his name was properly Jesus Christ ; and John might suppose that every reader who was acquainted with his introduction would understand by that name, as often as it occurred, the same person whom he had there called xoyoj. But although this name could not with propriety occur in a history of the man Christ Jesus, it is found in the beginning of the first Epistle of John, which, like his gospel, was opposed to the errors of Cerinthus. " That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life, rtf^t •foil ^.oyoD Tj^s ?cojj5, that declare we unto you." And in one of those sublime descriptions of the person of our Saviour, in his glorified slate, which are found in the book of Revelation, this name is directly applied to him. '' And he was clothed with a vesture dipt in blood ; and his name is called the Word of God," o'^oyoji-ou ©eov. Rev. xix. 13. If the book of Revelation was written, as there iias always appeared to me great reason to suppose, before the gospel of IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 259 John, this direct application of o j^oyoj to our Saviour, would render it easy for the Christians to understand the meaning of this intro- duction. After having gone at such length into the reason of the use of the word 'toyoj, which is the only real dilliculty in this passage, I shall easily deduce the proposition for the sake of which I quoted it, that Jesus created the world. Observe then, that ff a^xi^ necessarily brings to our minds the first words of Genesis, iva^z]] (^oirjnfv 6 ©fojroi/ ov^avoi^ xm Tr,v yrjv; and that both by this obvious reference to a well-known passage, and by what is said in the third verse, rtavra Si avtov eyevsto, tv »txr/ must be understood to mean a time before any thing was made. The Apostle asserts that, at this time, fv a^xr,^ the Word was. He does not say, tyiveto, was made, but *}v, existed ; and that the Word existed, not in a state of distance, but rf^oj roj/ ©for, at, or with God ; not in a state of inferiority, but ®io? rjv 6 %oyoi. This last clause is properly rendered, " the Word was God." It is common in the Greek language to distinguish the subject of a proposition from the predicate, by pre- fixing the article to the subject, and giving no article to the predicate. Examples of this will be found in Dr. Campbell's Commentary, and will occur to those who are familiar with the New Testament in the original. John iv. 24; xvii. 10. To cfraw the attention of the Christians to the error of Cerinthus, the second position is repeated in the second verse, o ^oyoj r;v rf^o; toj-Gaov ; and then after this explicit repeated affirmation of his original dignity, it is added, Tcavta Si avtov syevsto. It is not said that all other things were made by him, as if he was one created being. But rfai^ra 5i avtov sytptto -. and, according to the manner of this apostle, which abounds in repe- tition, and is here peculiarly fitted to meet the error of Cerinthus, it is added, ;t"?ij aDT-ou eytveto ovSe h o yeyovi, wliich marks strongly that his creating power extended to all parts of the universe. " In him," says the apostle, " was the life of men." Not only the great objects of nature were formed by him, but every individual being, every animal, derived existence from him. When he came to enlighten the world which he had made, he came nj-r-a tSca, to his own dominion, and those who did not receive liim were ol iStot, his own subjects. According to the system of the Gnostics, the Christ, the light of the world, came into the territory of another, to emancipate men from the tyranny of their maker. I3ut here original creation and future illumination are expressly ascribed to the same person, who being before all things with God, in the beginning made, and at a subse- quent period enlightened, the world. . I have only further to remark, that ?^yo5and ^umoyfiT^s, which, in the system of some of the Gnostics, were different ^ons, are in this passage the same with Jesus Christ. Having thus easily attained the proposition, which this passage was adduced to prove, I shall not have occasion to occupy time in refuting the two other interpretations which it has received. The one is tlie old Socinian interpretation, according to which, Jesus is called ^yo5 merely because he revealed or spoke the will of God to man ; and the first three verses receive the following paraphrase. " In the beginning of the gospel, there was a man, who, being the revealer of God's will, was called oxoyo^, who was with God, being taken up to heaven after his birth, that he might there learn what he was to 260 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS teach to others ; and who received, after his resurrection, the title of God, in virtue of the powers conferred upon him, and the office to which he was exalted. By this person the gospel dispensation was established, and without him no part of the world was reformed." According to this interpretation, it is supposed, without evidence, that the man Jesus was taken up to heaven ; Ey a^x^,^ contrary to its ob- vious meaning, is applied to the beginning of the gospel : the phrase @io;r;v 6 ■Koyoi is Considered as equivalent to this proposition, which ap- pears to be directly opposite, the man who was not God, is now made God ; and expressions which, by the analogy and use of the Greek language, denote that things were brought into being, are explained of a reformation of their state. But, besides all these reasons suggested by the words themselves, the history which I have given of the term xoyo?, is a clear refutation of this forced construction. For ^oyoj, or its equivalent in the Chaldee, being, at the time when this gospel was written, commonly applied to a person who made the world, John unavoidably misled his readers, if he gave that name to a man who did not exist before he was born of Mary, and said of that man bearing this name, that all things were made by him, when he only meant that all things were reformed by him. This Socinian interpretation is generally abandoned, even by those who deny the pre-existence of Jesus ; and they have adopted in place of it, the old Sabellian interpretation. Aoyo? signifies reason as well as speech ; 7'atio mente concepta, and ratio enunciativa. If it be translated in this place reason, the words of John will bear a striking allusion to a remarkable passage in the eighth chapter of the book of Proverbs. Wisdom thus speaks, " The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the Iseginning, or ever the earth was. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth. ' When he prepared the heavens, I was there ; when he appointed the founda- tions of the earth, then I was by him, as one brought up with him." Solomon, says Mr. Lindsey, represents Wisdom as a person dwelling with God, beloved by him, present with him, attending upon him in all his works of creation ; and so John says, in the beginning reason or wisdom was with God, i. e. God was complete in wisdom before he made any manifestation of himself to his creatures ; and all things were made by reason, i. e. were created according to the most perfect wisdom ; and reason was made flesh, i. e. the same divine wisdom which had appeared from the beginning in the creation of the world, was communicated in large measure to the man Jesus Christ, and residing in him became visible to us. When you judge of this interpretation, you will carry along with you, that all the Christian writers, from the earliest times, apply the description of Wisdom in the eighth chapter of Proverbs, to Christ. It is quoted and argued upon in this light ; and both those who held that Christ was God, and those who held that he was a creature, defended their opinions by particular expressions in this passage. To us who enjoy the revelation of the gospel, every fact of that descrip- tion appears most apposite to Christ. The true doctrine of the gospel respecting the person of Christ, seems to have been anticipated by his IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 261 illustrious predecessor ; and John, by the manifest similarity of some expressions in this passage to expressions in the description of Wis- dom, appears to give his sanction to this interpretation of the meaning of Solomon. It is not, however, in my opinion, probable that any person who had not our advantages, would have found the person of Christ in this description ; and if you lay out of your mind v/hat you know of Christ, and attend merely to the poetical strain of the first nine chapters of the book of Proverbs, you will probably be disposed to consider the passage in the eighth chapter as a beautiful and well-supported instance of prosopopoeia. But, allowing what no person can certainly know, that Solomon meant nothing more in that passage than to personify the divine attribute of wisdom, this does not afford the most distant reason for imagining that John also personifies reason. For observe the difierence of the cases. The prosopopaia of Solomon is in the midst of other passages of a like kind ; and there is no part of it inconsistent with those rules which are not of modern invention, but are essential to the nature and the beauty of this figure. But the prosopoposia in this place, if there be one, is introduced abruptly, without preparation, at the beginning of a plain history. It is executed in so inartificial a manner, that words and phrases per- petually occurring in the passage destroy the illusion, and require a .great effort of imagination to recal it. Reason, one attribute of the Deity, is called the only begotten, as if he had no other. Reason is called a man to whom another man bore witness ; and instead of cro^ta, the word used by the Septuagint in that personification which John is supposed to imitate, he introduces, and applies to the man of whom he speaks ^oyo?, a term applied at the very time of his writing to a person different from God, and inferior to him. To consider John, therefore, as meaning here a personification of the divine attri- bute of wisdom, is to suppose that he employs a misplaced and ill- supported figure of speech on purpose to mislead his readers ; that when he intended to say, Jesus was a man in whom the wisdom of God the maker of all things dwelt, he used language which, to the persons living in those days, and to all who study that language, can- not fail to convey the impression, that this man was a being who existed before any thing was made, and who created the world. Section II. Col. i. 15—18. The Apostle, in reminding the Christians at Colosse, amidst the sufferings to which their faith might expose them, of the grounds of thankfulness which it afforded, is led into one of those digressions which are common in his wrhings. He had been speaking of that redemption through the blood of Christ, which is the fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion. The redemption suggests to him the dignity and character of the ransomer. He expatiates upon these topics for a few verses, and then returns to the point from which he had set out. The digression, although it appears to interrupt the ~62 ACTIOS ASCSIBSD TO JESUS course of his argument, promotes most eifectuaily the great desisn of his Epistle, because it serves to satisfy the Colossiaus. that the Author of the ne\\- religion was qualuied for the omce which he assumed, and that their faith in him, without any aid from Jewish ceremonies, was able to save them. This digression is contained in the loth, 16th, 17th, and ISth verses of the first chapter. I shall first give that interpretation of these verses, which seems to arise out of the words themselves : and I shall next comment upon another interpretation which they have received. 'Oj- f5Ti» six^ rex 9sai rot a^aroi. It is proper to take along with this expression, two corresponding phrases in Heb. i. 3. — 'O,- w» a.tai-urua t*; Sogrj, xai rjc:xjr!Tp^ rrc i-*>7rajft>s- acrw.. All the three are hishlv figura- tive, as the whole language in which we presume to speak of the Almighty neiessarily must be. But attention to the point in which the three images coincide may assist us in understanding every one of them. Eix-a is a likeness or portrait, representing the features of a pers-3n, the expression and air of his countenance : ^-cairji-ua, that which shines forth from a ray, a brisht ray of his glory. Tne expres- sion is probably borrowed from the book of Wisdom, vii. 25, where Wisdom is called i-toe^txa rr: rot; ttarraxcaro^ &§r$ eUixftrjTS, a.tiu.-ytx-:aa fivyrcj oi^ua, ~ a pure ray flowing from the glory of the Almighty*, the bright- ness of the everlasting light.'* As light, says Dionysius of Alexan- dria, who wrote before the Council of Nice, is known by its shining forth, so orrof ati tw =«ro--, SrXas Li tjstr a£( tfo astiBrjfn.7fia. On this expression was grounded an argument for the eternity and consubstantiality of the Son. his being always with the Father, and of the same nature. Xifazrr^. trom zoe3."^ imprimo. a stamp, an impression, as that by which the figure engraved on a seal is truly represented in wax. Tr? f:t5;ra'5i>f wrroc. I must Warn you that the word v^ocrra-u-. whicli our translators have rendered Pei^^n, does not, either by its etymology, or by its use in the days of the Apostle, necessarily convey that distinction which we now mark, when we speak of the three Persons in the G'>ihead. For the first three centuries, ot-ca and i-Ttoma-Ai were tised promiscuously, and it was in the progress of controversy, that men being obliged to speak with more precision, and to define their terms, came to appropriate v?to7To«^ to denote a person, while w^^i signified that nature or substance which difierent persons might have in common. It would therefore have been more correct, because more agreeable to the language of the Apostle's time, to have render- ed zH^'^ "^ fci35ra5ft>:- 21TOC, the express image, or representation of his substance, i. e. of his essential attributes. It is always unsafe to build an argument upon figurative expressions : and, until we be further advanced in this inquiry, we are not warranted to say whether these three phrases ought to receive that strict interpretation which renders them descriptive of the nature of Christ. This much they certainly imply, that the glory of the divine pertections was most accurately reflected and exhibited to man in Jesus Christ. They may imply that this accurate exhibition arises from a similitude, or sameness of nature : and if plain declarations of Scripture shall authorize us to amx this meaning to these figurative phrases, you will recollect that it is such as they seem easily to bear. nfL.?9r«»w>j jt->7r? xrin^. The word rt^^anay; is applied by Homer, II. ly HIS PRE-EXISTZNT STATE. 26S xvii. 5, to an animal who, for the firsi time brouglit forth young ; ne^oToaw,- x«a»r. ot new ft^«x toxo^o- nou prius expert a parium. If we followed the analogy of the passage, we should translate aft-r&roxoj 7ta-r: xTt:;*i^e, he who first brought forth the whole creation, which would render it equivalent to a phrase, Rev. iii. 14, where Jesus calls him- self r a^xr rr: xti5c-k 'ov BiM. Mxr, in the language of ancient philosophy, denoted an efficient cause, that which gave a besinnin? to other things, a principle or source of existence. According to this received sense of the word, a^zr TijjxTi3«.>jrw0foi means more them our English translation conveys, — the beginning of the creation of God ; it is he who gave a beginning to, produced, the creation of God. But there are several reasons which prevent us from sivin? n^^oroxx razrj m^ft^ the sense which renders it equivalent to this true meaning of aczr -ri xTtjftij. 1. Although .-re-roToxor. like other compounds of rsroxa. occurs in an active sense, there is no insrance of its governing a case of the word, denoting the thing brought forth ; and that case, if there were one governed by it, would not be the genitive, 2. In other places of the Xew Testament, and in the ISth verse of this chapter, n^-corcaroj must be translated in a passive sense, not the first who brought forth, but the first who was brought forth. 3. If you translate it here in an active sense, then the 16th verse only repeats in a multitude of words that proposition of which it professes to sive a reason. He brought forth the whole creation : •• for all things were created by him.** For these reasons, Christian writers from the earliest times have under- stood this expression in a passive sense : and you will understand the meaning which they aifix to it, from the commentarv of Justin Martyr in the second century* : o >.o-;Oj, .t^o Tt^» .-to5- is rendered in our translation, " even,* creature.** According to the analogy of the Greek language, if xnla means creo, xri^r is creaiio, the act of creating, and xri.Z'ua. creatura. the thing created. It is true tliat this distinction is not invariably observed : for as -td-oli-- often denotes an action, a thing done, so xrtru- sometimes in the New Testa- ment must be translated a creature. But there are several passages where it must be understood in its orisinal import, as Rev. iiL 14, already quoted, and Rom. i. 20. ra oo^ara oi^^* a.to xii-t^. xo3*u»-,- ?«; nocruast looitwia xa5:eir=u. The English wouid havc come nearer the Greek if the word creation had been used here instead of creature : and if. at the same time, the true force of -le-jroroxoj had been express- ed by the insertion of the preposition, so as to make the whole clause stand thus, begotten before the whole creation, an inconvenience would have been avoided which arises from the present translation. 264 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS To a careless reader, indeed to every one who is not capable of looking into the original, these words, first-born of every creature, seem to convey that Jesus is of the same rank and order with other creatures, distinguished from them only in seniority ; and some Arians have urged this phrase in proof of the leading position of their system. But the words, if closely examined, really contain a refutation of that position which they appear to support. Had it been said, n^cotoxtoatoi Tiant^i xu(Siu!, this would havc implied that Jesus was a xfcaixa, like all other beings. But the word rt^c^totoxo; separates him from all the xtiai^ata. The act of producing them is x^ctii. But he is tf^^aj, derived, produced from the Father in a different manner, before any of them were made. It is not intimated in the word ^gwr'oT'oxoj, or in the phrase used by John sv a^xv> at what time the Son was thus pro- duced, whether immediately before the creation, or from eternity. That must be gathered from other passages of Scripture. All that we learn here is, that the existence of the Son of God was prior to that of any created being, and that the manner of his being produced is marked by a word different from creation. In verse sixteenth, the Apostle mentions an infallible proof of that which we have given as the amount of rc^i^totoxoi Ttaarji xttaM;. The Son of God was born before the whole creation, for every thing that can be conceived as a part of the creation was made by him. "On iv avtci ixifi,a9yi -ta rtcw-ta ra st> toii ou^ovotj xai, -tairH ttjiyrji, 'fau^ataxaitaao^ara, ute ^ovoL, stfs xv^totrits^, ci,ts a^;i;at, sets tlovstcu.' ■fa Ttavta Si avtov xav fij avtov exfi-afcU' The proposition is enunciated in such a manner as to draw our atten- tion very strongly to the universality of it. There is first the same division as in the first book of Genesis. Ei^ a^xn irtootj^n' 6 ©soj -tov oi^arov xac 'Trjv ytjv. Here tCL rttti'T'a fa cv totj OL'gwotj xM T'a srCt ■t*ii yrj^. And witll the same anxiety to mark the universality of the proposition, which suggested the repetition that we found in John, this Apostle adds, ta o^ata xai to. ao^ata. We deduce the propriety of this addition from what we know of the tenets of the Gnostics. They said that the visible world was made by the S»7,awi.^yoj, an iEon of inferior rank ; but that the invisible world, all the different orders of angels, were emanations from the Supreme mind. To them, therefore, ^wT'on'tt «;/ roii- ovgacoij XM ta erti, tr;^ y>j;i might sceui ouly to imply that the celestial bodies and this lower world were the work of Jesus. But ta ao^ata, joined to ta o^ara, has no meaning unless it comprehends the angels ; and that no order of angels might be conceived to be exempted, the Apostle adds several names, all of which, being introduced by the particles ate, appear to be partitions of ta ao^ata. We cannot explain the reason why these particular names are chosen. But we naturally infer, from their being chosen, that they refer to a system and a lan- guage with regard to angels that was then known. It was one of the doctrines of heathen philosophy, that between God, the Father of spirits, and man, there were many intermediate spirits, who had particular provinces allotted them in the government of the universe; and this doctrine was readily embraced by those who wished to incor- porate heathen pliilosophy with Rabbinical learnhig. For it accorded with the views given in the Old Testament of the dispensation of the law which was ordained by angels, and with the whole of that intei- course which the Almighty condescended to maintain with his chosen IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 265 people. We read in Scripture of Michael an archangel, and of a chief prince, of cherubim and seraphim, all which gives us reason to suppose that there are different orders amongst the spirits who excel in strength. Learned men have collected from the most ancient writings of the Jews that are extant, and from the mention which other authors incidentally make of their tenets, that they not only agreed in opinion with the heathen as to the superintendence of angels, but that many of them formed systems with regard to the orders and oiHces of these spirits, gave names to the different orders, and paid tliem a degree of homage corresponding to the opinion en- tertained of their nature. To these opinions and practices the Apostle manifestly refers, Col. ii. 18. And in accommodation to the systems formed upon this subject, he says iiere, that the angels, all of whom are withdrawn from the eyes of mortals, were made by the Son, whatever be their rank, implied in ^co^■o^• or power, in xve,wtrjti, from xo^toj; or extent of dominion, in a^A^at; or liberty allowed them in ex- ercising their power, in t^ovaiM, Jrom (hs-tL, licet. All iv av-tc^ (xticOir, and 6c at'toD ixriatai. These two expressions are equivalent. They were made through the exertion of a power residing in him. But ttj avtov implies more ; "5 marks the point to which an object tends ; and the use of it in this place suggests that Jesus did not create all things for the purpose of ministering to the pleasure or glory of another, but that as they proceeded from him, so they refer to him as their end. It is equivalent to an expression in the book of Revela- tion, i. 8, E-^o £i,ut T'o A xac fo Si, a^;^>; jcat *f^05, Xsyst (i Kvgtoc. It dcSCrVCS your particular notice, that by the use of this preposition «?» one of the forms of expression, which, in other places, seems to be appro- priated to the Father, is here applied to the Son. We read, Rom. xi. 36, fl avtov, xcu, 81 avtov, xai fij avT'or I'a jtav-ta, and 1 Cor. viii. 6, A^^' r;(xw tti ©J05 o rtatr;^, f| ov fa rtavta, xai i^pf ij £tj ai'T'or. xai ftj Kii^toj Ijjsoi'j X^tsfo;, 6t' ov "ta ftavtl xat, r;i.ist,i fia avrov. 'H;U«j fij avtov is UOt, " WC iu him," aS iu OUr translation, but " we to him," or " for him." The distinction made by the Apostle to the Corinthians, seems to be removed, when it is said, TtavtaSvavtol xai tijauT'o)/ tx-tiatai. Verse 17th, Kat avto; ta-a, 7(^0 rccwti^v. The Apostle may be considered as repeating the amount of the expression rt^wtoroxoj rtasi^s xtKStu?, that the existence of Jesus was prior to that of any created being, a repe- tition made with propriety, after the thing affirmed by him has been proved, by his being the Creator of all things ; or he may be con- sidered as saying something new. There are two circumstances which lead us to understand him so. 1. The import of av^oj, a pro-' noun which is more proper to introduce a new proposition than to repeat a former one. 2. The tense of "/"'i which intimates not what Jesus was before the creation, but what he is now. These circumstances render the first clause of the seventeenth verse an expression of pre-eminence. He who existed before all, and who created all, now stands before all, in a higher rank than any created being. Kat fa rtavta sv avta sweetrixs ; and in him they consist, being continually preserved by his agency. Paul has expressed creation fully in the sixteenth verse. And the pronoun avT'cj giving notice that something further is to be said of the same person, it is most natural to translate awiatr^xiv, according to classical use, by preservation. This 25 2 0 26G ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS is perfectly agreeable to the passage in Aristotle. A^;i;a'oj fiev ti; >.oyoj ovbsi.ua 8s fvaii, avtrj xaQ'' tavttjv avta^x-zj^ f^>;/^w5£trra t'jjj cx tovfou at^rrj^M^.* And also to an expression of Paul, Acts xvii. 28, where Paul shows an acquaintance with the Athenian poets. The quotation has been referred both to Aratus and Cleanthes, Thus, then, by an analysis of these three verses, we have found a learned Jew employing the language suggested by the writers of his own country and the philosophers of the times, as the most proper for expressing that Jesus, the Son of God, is the creator and the preserver of all. It cannot be denied that Jesus Christ is the person here spoken of For there is no other antecedent to the relative o^ but vtov •?>?; ayanr^^ avtov ; and as the eighteenth verse, by its meaning, must be applied to Jesus Christ, the first-born from the dead, there is as clear an intima- tion as can well be given, that the verses intervening between the fifteenth and the eighteenth, apply to him also. But these intervening verses, according to the analysis that has been given of them, are inconsistent with the first opinion concerning the person of Christ. And, therefore, those who hold that opinion, being unable to apply these verses to any other, are obliged to bring forward a system of interpretation, according to which they may, in consistency with their opinion, be applied to Christ. As this system is employed in the expUcation of several other passages, and is a characteristic mark perpetually recurring in the writings of those who are called Soci- nians, I shall take this opportunity of laying it before you fully, with the grounds upon which it is rested by themselves. The gospel is represented in Scripture as making a complete change upon the character of all who embrace it in faith. The opinions, the sentiments, the affections, the desires, the whole conduct of those who were converted from the superstition and gross vices of heathen- ism became different. They put off the old man which was corrupt, and they put on the new man which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. This total change, which restores tb.e image of God upon the soul of man, is called in different places by St. Paul, xmvyi xnavi; a significant figure, the meaning of which be- comes more obvious, if you translate it literally a new creation, rather than a new creature. Eit-ij bv K^iato, xawr^ xtiaii- -ta a.^x"^"' rta^yjXdiv, iSod ysyovi xciiva, tavta. 2 Cor. V. 17. And the apostle, in an epistle to the Ephesians, written at the same time as this Epistle, joining himself, according to his usual manner, with the converts, says, Adt'ou ya^ ssi-uv rtor/jua, x-tiaOivic; ev X^LStai Ir^rjov btH leyoi^ ayaOoi;. Epll. ii. 10. But the figurative language of Scripture does not stop here. The Jewish prophets were accustomed to describe future events relative to the fall of kingdoms, or their restoration, by images drawn from the Mosaic account of the creation. I will shake the heavens and the earth, is explained by Haggai to mean, I will overthrow the throne of kings. That I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, means, in Isaiah, the deliverance and restoration of the Jews. — In conformity to this frequent language of ancient prophecy, the * Arist. Opera, vol. i. Lib. de MunJo, ch. vi. 375. EJ. Lug. I IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 267 evangelical prophet Isaiah paints those blessed events wliich were to be the consequences of Christ's coming, the conversion from idolatry, the assurance of pardon, the practice of righteousness, and the union of Jews and Gentiles under one head, by these words : " Behold I create new heavens and a new earth : And the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."* There was a particular reason for the apostles of our Lord adopting and extending this image of Isaiah, because, in the interval between the days of the prophet and their days, the early opinions whh regard to the different orders of spiritual beings had been formed, by a mixture of Jewish tradition and heathen philosophy, hito a regular system. It was believed that those angels, who had rebelled against God, exercised a malignant influence over the minds and bodies of men ; and that the heathen were subject to the rule of the prince of those spirits, who is styled in Scripture, " the prince of this world. "t But Jesus " was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil, "J He himself says, " I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."§ He gave his disciples power over evil spirits : and he is said to be now " set in the heavenly places far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion ; angels, and authorities, and powers being made subject to him."|| The gospel dispensation, then, is represented in Scripture under the idea of a new creation of men : a regulation of the heavenly communities, a reformation of all things, rtanyyafcrta: and all this is only a figurative language, according to the style of ancient prophecy, describing in a manner the most likely to convince the understandings, and to affect the imaginations of those who were addressed, the infinite importance of the gospel, the power exerted in its propaga- tion, its intended universality, and the efficacy with which it establishes truth and virtue in the mind of man. According to this general system of interpretation, which is applied to many passages of Scripture, the three verses in question are thus understood. The Son of God, under whose rule you converts are now placed, is the representative of the invisible God, the Lord, (the word first-born is conceived to be adopted instead of Lord, in reference to that right which primogeniture conveys amongst men,) the Lord of the new creation ; Jews and Gentiles being regenerated into one mass by that doctrine which he first preached. For the effects of his reli- gion may be represented under the figure of a new creation of all things, there being not only a reformation of the world of mankind, but a subjection to Christ of those heavenly powers who, according to Jewish notions, formerly bore rule on earth. The terms in which these powers are here spoken of were found in Jewish traditions. But it matters not how far the tradhions were well-founded. Whether the powers were real or imaginary, the style used would convey to those whom the apostle is addressing, the same exalted idea of the power of Christ. And the whole image is introduced merely to paint tlie excellency of the gospel above all former dispensations. I have endeavoured, in the exposition of this system of interpreta- tion, to do justice to the principles upon which it rests. And I have * Isaiah Ixv. 17. f John xiv. 30. + 1 John iii. 8. § Luke X. 18. 11 Ephes. i. 20, 21. 1 Peter iii. 22. 268 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS explained it^ not according to the rude form which it first bore, but with all the improvements and corrections to which modern Socinians have been driven by a multitude of objections. Before we proceed to examine particularly the application of this system to the passage before us, there are two general observations which I wish to premise, the one concerning the use of allegory in Scripture ; and the other concerning the interpretation of allegory. — 1. It is allowed that allegory was a favourite method of conveying truth in ancient times, and that while the vulgar rest in the literal sense, an enlargement of understanding is discovered in apprehending the further meaning. There are allegories of different kinds in the Old Testament. There are many passages, such as Psalm Ixxii., which apply, in a certain sense, to events that fell under the prophet's observation, but the full explication of which is found in the dispen- sation of the gospel. This arose naturally from the character of the Old Testament, which was a preparatory dispensation, looking for- ward in all its points to the grace and truth that were to come by Jesus Christ. When grace and truth did come, this reason for the use of allegory ceased. For the gospel being the last dispensation, it has not, like the law, to give intimation during its existence, of an approaching change. Yet still the general uses of figurative language ^ continue ; and it may be expected that the writers of the New Testa- ment, educated in reverence for the books of the ancient prophets, and full of their images, would not lay them aside entirely in de- scribing the events which those images had been employed to foretell. Hence an acquaintance with the figurative language of the Old Testament is of great service in expounding the New ; and the exact correspondence between the two dispensations may be so employed as to make them throw light upon one another. 2. With regard to the interpretation of the allegories which are found in Scripture, I have to observe, that the same propensity to allegorize, or to find hidden spiritual meanings in plain expressions, which is discovered by some commentators upon Homer and other ancient writers, has been the occasion of very great abuse in the exposition of Scripture. From the days of Origen to the present times, the inspired writings have been brought into ridicule, or have had the truths in them per- verted by the intemperate exercise of this propensity. In mystical authors, the gospel has been made to assume a form which disfigures its simplicity, and alters its character : and by those writers, whose principles lead them to banish out of Christianity every doctrine that is not easily comprehended, the language of that religion is often rendered enigmatical. For, as has been pointedly said of them, the Socinians take mystery out of the doctrine of Scripture, where it is venerable, and they place it in the phrase of Scripture, where it is repugnant to God's sincerity. The recollection of these abuses should make you receive with some suspicion every allegorical ex- position of Scripture. And in judging of it, it becomes you to recol- lect those rules concerning the proper introduction of figurative lan- guage, which have been dictated by good sense and enlarged obser- vation, and which are commonly applied in reading other writers, both as a test of their good taste, and as a method of attaining their true meaning. You have direct notice from some expressions in a IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 269 passage, that the words are to be understood m a figurative sense. Or you find, upon examining them closely, that there is a defect in the meaning if you understand them literally. Or the context in- timates, that a passage which appeared when considered singly to be literal, is really figurative. There does not occur to me any other way, in which you can be warranted to give a passage of an inspired author a sense different from that which the words naturally bear ; and if none of these directions are given us in this place, the Socinian interpretation of these three verses must be considered as an unneces- sary and licentious introduction of allegory. There is not any expression in these verses Avhich necessarily suggests a figurative sense. All the nominatives introduced as distri- butives of ta fiavta, are words generally used in the language of those times to denote created objects ; and xti^i^ with its derivatives, is the verb commonly used in the New Testament to denote creation. A|to5 II, Kv^is, T^aSiiv ■tmv So^av — urt av fxT'ttfaj fa rtavta, xai, 6ia -to ^iXr^ixa aov tisi, xox, sxfiaer^aav. Rev. iv. 11, ario xtioia; xooixov. Rom. i. 20. It is true that xtc^oi, and xrwtj? are employed to denote reformation. But some expression is always joined with them in these passages to give notice that they are transferred from their original meaning. When Paul uses xiiavi in this sense, 2 Cor. v. 17, Gal. vi. 15, he prefixes the epithet xaivri, which is probably borrowed from the Septuagint transla- tion of that passage in Isaiah, which runs in our Bibles,"! create new iieavens and a new earth." Eurae. 6 oD^avoj xat tj yrj xawri ; and Avhen he uses the verb xtiJ^a in the same figurative sense, the intimation is still more direct, xmBiv-m ini, t^yotj ayaOotj, Ephesians ii. 10. In these places, the writer plainly leads us from the literal to the figurative sense. Here there is no such intimation ; and the first appearance of the words does not suggest any reason why we may not translate them literally. When we examine them according to this literal translation, we do not find such a defect in the meaning as might warrant our rejecting it and substituting a figurative sense in its place. W'e believe, by the light of nature, that all the things here spoken of, Extinta.1, were called out of nothing. The new information given us is, that this was done tv avT'9, by the Son of God. But it is a very bold speculation to reject the obvious meaning of a proposition con- tained in the gospel, merely because it gives new information ; and those who believe the inspiration of Scripture will require some other reason to be assigned before they find themselves at liberty to depart from the obvious meaning ; more especially as they observe that the attempt to bring plain truth out of the words in this place, by such departure, is very unsuccessful. You cannot conceive a reason for so particular an enumeration as is here given in the partitives of ta rtwta., unless the action meant by the word cxtio'tat, extended to all the things enumerated. But that action cannot be reformation ; For with regard to the phrase *a tTtv t-jjj y*??, even although you restrict its meaning to men, the inhabitants of earth, we know that many have died without hearing the gospel, and that many who do hear it are not the better for it : and with regard to the other phrase, ta ev ta ov^ai'M,\ve havc uo grouud for thinking that the character of the evil angels, revealed in Scripture, was in the least improved by our Saviour's coming, or that the character of the good angels stood 25* 270 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS in need of any amendment : and thus the notion conveyed by -the phrase xmv/^ xti'sti, does not apply to a great part of the ■fa tHc rrji ->>??, or to any of the to, tp toi ov^avci. The modern Socinians, aware of the force of this objection, have substituted in place of xawyj xftsi.;, or rather have added to it what they call regulation. The evil angels, they say, are stripped of their power by Jesus, and he is placed at the head of the angelic host. But this is a figurative use of the word xti^a not warranted by the other expressions in the Epistles of Paul, where a new creation is meant ; and if it be adopted here, by departing from the plain literal sense of sxu'yer;, you are obliged in the same sentence to give it two figurative meanings, one reformation, applied to those inhabitants of earth who become by the gospel " the workmanship of God, created unto good works; the other regulation or subjection, applied to all those beings whose character is not changed by the gospel. It is plain then, that as the words themselves do not neces- sarily suggest a figurative sense, nothing is gained in point of easy or significant interpretation by forcing it upon them. But perhaps the context will justify it. In an extended allegory, the first sentence is generally obscure. But the primary and secondary sense are gradually unfolded by the art of the composition ; and, when we look back to the beginning after having arrived at the end, the whole becomes clear. Here the case is totally ditferent. In the eighteenth verse, Jesus is styled "the head of the body of the church," i. e. of those who were rescued by his blood out of the slavery of sin, and translated into his kingdom. The same word, Tt^c^totoxoi, which had been applied to him in reference to Ttarri^f xnTEwj, is there applied to him in reference to vsx^w, because he was the first that rose, or was brought forth out of the bowels of the earth, never to die any more ; and as he was not only before the creation but produced it, so he was not only the first that rose, but also a^x^, the efficient cause of the resurrection of others. The Head, by rising, gave assurance that the members of the body should in due time be raised also. And thus, as the pronoun avto^ is the natural intimation that something else is to be said about the Person who had been mentioned before, so if you understand the sixteenth and seventeenth verses as expressing a literal creation, there is a striking analogy between the phrases that had been used upon that subject, and the phrases used upon the new subject in the eigliteenth verse. And there seems to be a direct notice given, that the subjects are different, by the last clause of the eighteenth verse, ica ysvrjtai, cv Ttmiv avto^ rt^wtfuuv, by which means he might become the first in all things. He was the first in creation, both as existing before all creatures, and as having made them : He became after his death the first also in the scheme for the recovery of the world, because being the first that rose, he is the cause of the resurrection of others. Such is the light which a plain interpretation of the first three verses throws upon the context. If, on the other hand, you understand them figuratively, you are reminded as you advance in the context that the harsh interpretation, which you had been obliged to impose upon the phrases contained in them, is not the true one, because by it you confound these three verses with the eighteenth ; you lose the beauty in the analogy of the corresponding IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT ST.ATE. 271 parts, and in the repetition of the word rtgwtorozoj ; and you destroy entirely the meaning of the last clause of the eigliteenth verse. It appears, then, that according to those rules of interpretation, which a regard to perspicuity or ornament suggests, the Sociniau sense of this passage is indefensible ; and, therefore, it must be con- sidered in the sense which naturally presents itself to every person who reads it, as a declaration that Jesus Christ is the Creator of the world ; a declaration introduced most seasonably in this place, to exalt the dignity of the Author of the Gospel in the eyes of the new converts to that religion. Section III. Hebrews i. The last passage which I mentioned as containing a full declara- tion that Jesus is the creator of the world, is the first chapter to the Epistle of the Hebrews. I do not mean to give a particular com- mentary upon all the parts of that chapter, because many of them have no immediate connexion with our present object ; but I shall state in general the purport of the apostle's argument, that you may see the propriety and significancy with which the declaration that Ave seek finds a place in this chapter. The apostle is writing to Jews, who had embraced the Gospel, in order to furnish them with answers to those objections, which their unbelieving countrymen urged against the new religion. The first source from which the answers are drawn, is the superior dignity of the author of that religion. The law, indeed, was given from Mount Sinai by the ministry of angels ; and the succession of prophets who enlightened the Jewish nation were messengers of heaven. But the various manifestations of himself which the Almighty had made in former times, no'Kv^f^^i xm Tto^vt^oftui, cannot claim so high a degree of reverence as that message which, in the last days, the time that had been announced as the conclusion of the law, was brought by a person more glorious than a prophet or an angel : 'Oi^ (Or,xs xXi^^opojxov rtavtuv, 6t oil xat fovj aiw^aj erCoctjazv' 'Oj uv (xHavyasixa, ■trji 5o|»2J5 xao a^a^axtj;^ ^j;; irtoofatTfWj avtov, ft^oiv tc -to. rtavta T'9 ^t/jfua-ti, tr]^ Swa^isui avT'ov, 81 eavtfov xada^iSfiov rt.o(,i^!Ja.fA.fvoi -tuv ajxa^tiuv r;iA.uv, exaOiOtv sv Si^ia trji /xeyaXaavvrii sv v-^Xov^. ThlS is the description given of that person by whom, says the apostle, God in these last days hath spoken to us. When it is said of the King Eternal, (Orixt x^.rt^ovofj.ov, we must understand this figurative expression in a sense consistent with his unchangeable glory, and such a sense is suggested by the ideas universally annexed to x^rsoroj^oi. The heir has an interest in the estate more intimate than that of any one per- son except the proprietor ; and he may be intrusted with a degree of authority over it, because it cannot be supposed that he will abuse that which he is to possess. Hence in the old Roman law, hxres and do77ii?ius were considered as equivalent terms. " Pro harede gerere est pro domino gerere," says Justinian : and Paul, in allusion to this 272 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS maxim of law, says, Gal. iv. 1, " The heir while he is a minor, is under tutors, xv^wj Ttavtiov w." Agreeably to this import of the word xxri^ovofio^, Christians of every sect understand the expression here used to mean that God constituted Jesus Lord of all. They agree also that his appointment to this sovereignty was declared to the world at his resurrection. The point upon which they differ is the character of Jesus before this appoint- ment. Those who hold the first opinion concerning his person, that he is ■^'t^oj avO^MTtoi, consider the titles of honour, that are ascribed to him in Scripture, as flowing from his being constituted Lord of all things : and they endeavour to explain the first three verses in such a manner, as that they shall not seem to imply any original dignity of nature. He is called the Son of God, they say, because he is made heir or Lord of all. By him God regulated and reformed the world ; or, understanding atwm?, according to the literal import of the Avord and its use in several places of Scripture, to denote the ages, and considering 81 ov as equivalent to 8i ov, they thus paraphrase the last clause of the second verse ; for whom, in respect to whom, in order to illustrate whose glory, when he should be constituted Lord of all, God disposed or ordered the ages : i. e. the antediluvian, the patri- archal, and the legal ages, all the divine dispensations towards the sons of men. They interpret the first two clauses of the third verse as expressions of that perfect representation of the divine perfections, which appeared in the character of Jesus while he dwelt upon earth. Every one who saw that excellent man in whom the power, the wisdom, and the goodness of God resided, saw the Father also. They apply the clause, upholding all things by the word of his power, to his transactions upon earth, that command over nature which was given him, and all those miracles by which he proved his divine com- mission, and established that dispensation which, having been opened by his preaching, and sealed by his death, is magnified in the eyes of men by the resurrection of its author, and by their knowing assuredly that he is set on the right hand of the throne of God, having obtained an authority and a rank superior to that of the angels. There is an apparent consistency in this interpretation which ren- ders it plausible. But when you weigh the several expressions here used, you will find that it is by no means adequate to their natural import. 1. Jesus is called the Son of God, whom he made heir, a construction which implies that he was the Son of God before his appointment to the sovereignty. 2. 81 oi xm -tovi atwvaj snoit^asv, are words that would not probably suggest to the first readers of this epistle, either by whom God reformed the world, or, by whom he disposed the ages. Some critics have thought the natural translation of them to be, by whom God made the angels, as it is likely that, before this epistle was written, the Gnostics used ol aiwi/sj to mark the multitude of spirits who were emanations from the supreme mind. But although this use of the word might be known to the apostle, we have no reason for thinking that it was at that time so familiar to Christians, that the apostle would choose, without any explication, to introduce it into an epistle written for the purpose of confirming their faith in the Gospel, more especially as another interpretation of these words could not fail readily to occur to their minds. We are told that IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 273 ot oiwj'sj is equivalent to a Hebrew phrase, Avhich the ancient Jews employed to mark the whole extent of creation, divided by them into three parts, this lower world, the celestial bodies, and the third heavens, or habitation of God. The Greek word atw^ an wr, was applied to the world as marking its duration in contradistinction to the short lives of many of its inhabitants. The word occurs often in the New Testament in this sense ; and there is one passage which appears to be decisive of the meaning of this phrase. Heb. xi. 3, rttatnvoovfiEV xairi^tio6av tovi aiuvai jj^jfiati, ®iov. If yoU join tO this received use of aicoms, thd.t trtoitjas is the word used in the Septuagint translation of the first verse of Genesis, and that fita is one of the prepositions which we found in the Epistle to the Colossians, expressing the creation of all things by the Son, you will not be inclined to doubt that this clause contains another declaration to the same purpose ; and when you so understand it, you see the reason of the particle xm being introduced. The Son, whom God did "appoint heir of all, 5t cv XM, by whom also," it is a further information concerning his person, no way implied in the appointment, and its being additional is marked by XM, « he made the worlds." 3. According to this interpretation of 8J oil :iat, t'ouj aiwva{ crCoitjss, ^f^iov is ia Tlavta tcjt ^rjfiatc t'jjj fiwa^uttoj av-tov, will naturally express his being the preserver and supporter of all things which he created, as the apostle to the Colossians had said, " by him all things consist." And, 4th, The first two clauses of the third verse, which are equivalent to the expression that we found there, ctxwv rov @sov iov ao^ajov, appear by their form, as well as their meaning, intended to convey additional information concerning the person of the Son, so that the amount of the third verse may be thus stated, the Son, appointed by God the Lord of all, by whom God created the world, -who being originally a bright ray of the Father's glory, and the exact representation of his essence, and supporting without any fatiguing exertion all the things made by him, did in the last days appear to wash away sin by the sacrifice of himself, and having accomplished this work, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. It appears from this review of the first three verses, that besides the simple proposition which the Socinians find in them, that the man by whom God spoke in the last days is now the Lord of all, they contain also further intimation concerning this man, as being the Son of God, by whom he made the world. These further intimations require proof, and they do not admit the same kind of proof with the simple proposition that he is now Lord of all. That was made mani- fest by the extraordinary gifts with which he endowed the first preachers of his religion, gifts sufficient to prove that all power in heaven and in earth is now given to him, but not sufficient to establish with certainty any conclusion, which extends to his state previous to the time of his receiving that power. As there is thus occasion for proving the further intimations concerning the person of Christ, which we have found in the first three verses, it is natural to look for that proof in the remaining part of the chapter, which seems at first reading to relate to the same subject ; and the proof is formally introduced by the fourth verse. Toaovt x^ntruv ycwixtvoi tuv ayyau>v, 6aa Si-i^o^iots^oi' rta|j avtovi xixrio^oiotn^xH' ofOjua, which may be literally rendered thus : " being as far superior to the angels, as the name which he hath 2V 274 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS inherited is more excellent than theirs." The point to be proved is not that he is now superior to the angels ; that is self-evident, if he be Lord of all ; but that the name which he has inherited as always belonging to him, and the characters by which he has been announced in the former revelations of God, imply a pre-eminence over the angels corresponding to his present exaltation. This point, a proof of which the train of the apostle's argument requires, is fully established in the following verses, in the manner most satisfactory to the Hebrews, by a reference to their own Scriptures. I shall just mark the steps of the proof, without staying to illustrate fully the several quotations. 1. He is called the Son of God, with an emphasis which is never applied to any other being. Of the two citations in the fifth verse, the one is taken from Psalm ii. which the Jews considered as a pro- phecy of the Messiah ; the other from a message which the prophet Nathan brought to David, 1 Chron. xvii. 11 — 14. There is no mention in that message of the Messiah, but there are these words, which point to a greater than Solomon. " And it shall come to pass when thy days be expired, that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons. I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son ; and 1 will settle him in mine house, and in my kingdom for ever." 2. The Psalmist represents the Son as the object of worship to angels. 6. 'Or'ttf Si Tta.'Kiv SLaarjuyv] tov rt^wi'OT'oxoj' ftj Trjv oixovjxivi^v, 'Kiyn' Kat Ti^oaxvvrjnatioaav avta rtwrEj ayycxoi ©sou. The repetition of the adverb ft^uv is the common method by which the apostle introduces a succession of quota- tions. It is therefore a very forced construction which has been given to this verse, " When he bringeth again the first begotten, when he raiseth him from the dead." The command is taken from the Septua- gint translation of Psalm xevii. The psalm appears to relate to God the Father. But we are taught by the authority of the apostle, in this citation, to apply it to the Son. " When God bringeth in the first begotten, /. e. when he announceth his coming into the world, he saith, Let all the angels of God worship him." 3. The pre-eminence of the Son over the angels is inferred from the very different language which is employed in relation to the angels and him, ngo? fnv ■tovi ayyt^ous xsyst. ngo5 8s 'tov vlov 7, 8, 9. The angels are spoken of as servants ; the Son is addressed by the name of God, as a king, whose throne is everlasting. The quotations are taken from Psalms civ. and xlv. which the Jews were accustomed to apply to the Messiah. Although it be not very much to my present purpose, I cannot avoid mentioning an ingenious criticism on the 7th verse, which is found in Grotius, which was adopted by Dr. Lowth in his elegant book De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, and is illustrated by Dr. Campbell in one of his critical dissertations. Three authorities so respectable claim our attention. It is not easy to affix any meaning to the seventh verse, which both in this place, and in Psalm civ. is thus rendered, " Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire." But the Hebrew as well as the Greek word for spirits may be translated "'winds," and ayysxoj is the general word for " messenger ;" so that the verse admits of a translation most agreeable to the context in Psalm civ. " Who maketh the clouds his chariot, IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 275 who walketli upon the wings of the wind ; who maketh the winds his messenger, and the flaming fire his servant," i. e. who employs wind and fire to accompUsh his purposes. This meaning enters most naturally into the Psalm, which celehrates the glory of God as it appears in the material creation, and, if adopted here, contributes very much to the force of the apostle's reasoning, by the improvement which it makes upon the sense of the quotation. " So little sacred- ness is there in the name Angels, that it is applied in Scripture to inanimate objects, storm, and lightning. But so sacred is the name of the Son, that the Person who bears it is addressed by the Almighty as an everlasting King. Thy throne, 0 God, is for ever and ever." There is one objection to this change which I was very much surprised to find the minute accuracy of Dr. Campbell had omitted to mention. It is contrary to the rule to which I referred when speaking of these words, ©soj j^w o xoyoj, that in Greek the predicate is commonly distinguished from the subject of a proposition by being without the article, more especially when the predicate stands first; w^ ■^ t^fie^a tysvsto. I doubt not that it was a regard to this rule which led our translators of the Old and New Testament to adopt a dark expression instead of an obvious one. I believe that this distinction between the predicate and the subject of a proposition is observed, with very few exceptions, and much advantage arises from the observance of it. At the same time, as the rule is fonnded merely upon practice, and not, as far as 1 know, upon any thing essential to the constitution of the language ; and as, in the best writers, anomalous expressions sometimes occur, it does not appear to me that the place of the article in this verse is a sufficient reason for rejecting a translation which is so striking an improvement. 4. The fourth quotation, 10, 11, 12, is taken from Psalm cii. There is not in that psalm any direct mention of the Son of God. But if you admit that the books of the New Testament are inspired, you cannot suppose that the apostle was mistaken in applying these words; and, therefore, the only question is, whether he does apply them to Jesus Christ. The succession of quotations leads you to expect this application, for there would be an abruptness inconsistent both with elegance and perspicuity, if between the third and the fifth quota- tions, both of which are addressed to the Son, there should be intro- duced, without any intimation of the change, one addressed to the Father ; and all the attempts to establish a connexion made by those who consider it as thus addressed are so forced and unnatural, as to satisfy us that they are mistaken. You may judge of the rest by that attempt which is the latest, and is really the most plausible. Those, then, who consider the 10th, 11th, and 12th verses, as addressed to God the Father, endeavour to prepare for this application of the words by translating the beginning of the 8th verse in a manner which the syntax admits, although it creates a very harsh figure. " Unto the Son, he saith, God is thy throne for ever," /. e. the support of thy throne. As it is said by God to the Messiah, Psalm Ixxxix. 4. "I will build up thy throne to all generations." And they con- sider the 10th, nth, and 12th verses as introduced to show the un- changeableness of that God who is the support of the Messiah's 276 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS throne. It shall endure for ever ; for that Lord who hath promised to support it has laid the foundations of the earth, and remains the same after the heaA^ens are dissolved. And thus the apostle is made to interrupt a close argument by bringing in three verses, in order to prove what nobody denied, that God is unchangeable. The question is not whether God be able to fulfil his promise. That was admitted by all the Hebrews, whether they received the Gospel or not. But the question is, what God had promised and declared to the JNIessiah ; and, therefore, these three verses, according to the interpretation now given of them, may be taken away without hurting the apostle's argument, or detracting in the least from the information conveyed concerning the person of Christ. On the other hand, if, following the train of the apostle's reasoning, you consider this quotation as addressed to the same person with the third and fifth, it is a proof of that assertion in the end of the 2d verse, 8i oi km tov^ atum? ertoi^j-K, of which no proof had hitherto been adduced ; and it is a direct proof of such a kind that it cannot be evaded. For the figurative sense, given by the Socinians to the passage in the Colossians, will not avail them here, because the heavens and the earth spoken of in this place are to perish, and wax old like a garment. But the kingdom of righteousness, which Isaiah expressed by new heavens and a new earth, shall endure for ever. The number of its subjects is continually increasing ; and they who are " the workmanship of God in Christ Jesus, created unto good works," shall shine for ever with unfading lustre in the kingdom of their Father. The material, not the moral creation, shall be changed ; and, therefore, the material creation must be meant by that earth and those heavens, which are said to be the work of the Lord here addressed. 5. The original pre-eminence of Jesus Christ is inferred, in the last place, from the manner in which the promise of that dominion, which was to be given him, is expressed in the Old Testament. The quo- tation in the 13th verse is taken from Psalm ex. which the ancient Jews always applied to the Messiah. It contains a promise which was fulfilled in the Son's being appointed Lord of all things, and in his sitting down on the right hand of the majesty on high. The argument turns upon the style of this promise. A seat on the right is in all countries the place of honour; and when the Almighty says to tlie Messiah, "' Sit thou at my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool," the address conveys to our minds an impression of tlie dignity of the person upon whom so distinguished an honour was conferred, as well as of the stability and perpetuity of his kingdom. The Almighty never spoke in this manner to any angel. They do not sit at his right hand. They are spirits employed in public works, sent forth at his pleasure in different services. They are not the ser- vants of men. But the services appointed them by God are 5ia rouj ^tfxxorroj x'Kri^ovoixsvf csu>fin^iav, upou accouut of, for the benefit of, those who are to inherit eternal life. The Son, on the other hand, remains in the highest place of honour, without ministration, till those who resist his dominion be completely subdued. There arises from this review of the latter part of the chapter, ^he strongest presumption that we gave a right interpretation of the first three verses. For if we consider the apostle as there stating the IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 277 original pre-eminence of the person who is now appointed Lord of all, we find the most exact correspondence between the positions laid down at the beginning, and the proofs of them adduced in the sequel : whereas if, by a forced interpretation of some phrases in the first three verses, we consider them as stating simply the dominion of Christ, without any respect to his having been in the beginning the Son of God, and the Creator of the world, we are reminded, as we advance, of the violence which we did to the sense of the autlior, by meeting with quotations which we know not how to apply to that simple proposition to which we had restricted his meaning. Section IV. Having now found in Scripture, full and explicit declarations that Christ is the creator of the world, I shall direct your attention to the amount of that proposition, before I proceed to the other actions that are ascribed to Jesus in his pre-existent state. The three passages that have been illustrated are a clear refutation of tiie first opinion concerning the person of Christ. If he was the Creator of the world, he cannot be -^aoi ave^i^noi. But it is not obvious how far this proposition decides the question between the second and third opinions, whether he be the first and most exalted creature of God, or whether he be truly and essentially God. It has, indeed, been said by a succession of theological writers, from the Ante-Nicene fathers to the present day, that creation, i. e. the bringing things out of nothing to a state of being, is an incommunicable act of Omnipo- tence ; that a creature may be employed in giving a new form to what has been already made, but that creation must be the work of God himself; so that its being ascribed in Scripture to Jesus Christ is a direct proof that he is God. It appears to me upon all occasions most unbecoming and pre- sumptuous for us to say what God can do, and what he cannot do ; and I shall never think that the truth or the importance of a conclu- sion warrants any degree of irreverence in the method of attaining it. The power exerted in making the most insignificant object out of nothing by a word, is manifestly so unlike the greatest human exer- tions, that we have no hesitation in pronouncing that it could not proceed from the strength of man ; and when we take into view the immense extent, and magnificence, and beauty of the things thus created, the different orders of spirits, as well as the frame of the material world, our conceptions of the power exerted in creation are infinitely exalted. But we have no means of judging whether this power must be exerted immediately by God, or whether it may be delegated by him to a creature. It is certain that God has no need of any minister to fulfil his pleasure. He may do by himself every thing that is done throughout the universe. Yet we see that in the ordinary course of providence he withdraws himself, and employs the ministry of other beings ; and we believe that, at the first appearance 26 278 ^ ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS of the gospel, men were enabled by the divme power residing in them to perform miracles, i. e. such works as man cannot do, to cure the most inveterate diseases by a word, without any application of human art, and to raise the dead. Although none of these acts im- ply a power equal to creation, yet as all of them imply a power more than human, they destroy the general principle of that argument, upon which creation is made an unequivocal proof of deity in him who creates. And it becomes a very uncertain conjecture, whether reasons perfectly unknown to us might not induce the Almighty to exert, by the ministry of a creature, powers exceeding in any given degree those by which the apostles of Jesus raised the dead. But although I do not adopt the language of those who presume to say that the Almighty cannot employ a creature in creating other creatures, there appears to me, from the nature of the thing, a strong probability that this work was not accomplished by the ministry of a creature ; and when to this probability is joined the manner in which the Scriptures uniformly speak of creation, and the style of those passages in which creation is ascribed to Jesus, there seems to arise from this simple proposition, that Christ is the Creator of the world, a conclusive argument that he is God. I. A strong probability, from the nature of the thing, that the work of creation was not accomplished by the ministry of a creature. By creation we attain the knowledge of God. In a course of fair reasoning, proceeding upon the natural sentiments of the human mind, we infer from the existence of a world which was made the existence of a Being who is without beginning. But this reasoning is interrupted, in a manner of which the light of nature gives no v/arning, if that work which to us is the natural proof of a Being who exists necessarily, was accomplished by a creature, ?'. e. by one who owes his being, the manner of his being, and the degree of his power entirely to the will of another. By this intervention of a creature between the true God and the creation, we are brought back to the principles of Gnosticism, which separated the Creator of the world from the Supreme God ; and the necessary consequence of considering the Creator of the world as a creature is, that, instead of the security and comfort which arise from the fundamental principle of sound theism, we are left in uncertainty with regard to the wisdom and power of the Creator, to entertain a suspicion that he may not have executed in the best manner that which was committed to him, that he may be unable to preserve his work from destruction or alteration, and that some future arrangements may substitute in place of all that he has made, another world more fair, or other inhabitants more per- fect. It is not probable that the uncertainty and suspicion, which necessarily adhere to all the modifications of the Gnostic system, would be adopted in a Divine Revelation ; that a doctrine which combats many particular errors of Gnosticism would interweave into , its constitution this radical defect, and would pollute the source of virtue and consolation which natural religion opens, by teach- ing us that the heavens and the earth are the work, not of the God and Father of all, but of an inferior minister of his power, removed, as every creature must be, at an infinite distance from nis glory. IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 279 II. This presumption, which, however strong it appears, would not of itself warrant us to form any conclusion, is very much con- firmed, when we attend to the manner in which the Scriptures uniformly speak of creation. You will recollect, that in the Old Testament, Maker of heaven and earth is the characteristic of the true God, by which he is distinguished from idols. " The Lord," says Jeremiah, "is the true God; he is the living God, and an ever- lasting King. The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion." Jer. x. 10, 11, 12. Creation is uniformly spoken of as the work of God alone.* And it is stated as the proof of his being, and the ground of our trust in him.t " The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handy-work. The sea is his, and he made it, and his hands formed the dry land. 0 come, let us worship and bow down ; let us kneel before the Lord our Maker. 0 Lord, how manifold are thy Avorks : in wisdom hast thou made them all. "J I have selected only a few striking passages. But they accord with the whole strain of the poetical books of the Old Testament : and the apostle Paul states the argument contained in them, when he says to the Romans, i. 20. " The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being under- stood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God- head." The things made by God are to us the exhibition of his eternal power : and a few verses after, when he is speaking of the worship of the heathen, the form of his expression intimates that no being intervenes between the creature and the Creator. " They served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever ;" ■fov xfiijai'T^a, o^ sstiv ivxoYr^toiH^tovi aimui. I havo Only to add, that the book of Revelation states creation as the ground of that praise which is offered by the angels in heaven. " The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying. Thou art worthy, 0 Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power ; for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."§ III. The style of the three passages of the New Testament, in which creation is ascribed to Jesus Christ, does not admit of our con- sidering him as a creature. In the first of the three passages, Jesus is called God. It is admitted that the word God is used in Scripture in an inferior sense, to denote an idol, which exists only in the imagi- nation of him by whom it is worshipped as a god, and to denote a man raised by office far above others. But it has been justly observed, that the arrangement of John's words renders it impossible to affix any other than the highest sense to ©foj in this place. In the first verse of John, the last word of the preceding clause is made the first of that which follows. Ef a^^^t^ y^v u Xoyoi, xai u ^.oyoj r^v rt^oj Tor Qsov, xai 0£oj * Job. xxxviii, Isaiah xl. 12 ; xliv. 24. f Isaiah xl. 26. Jer. xiv. 22. + Psalm, xix. xcv. cis'. § Rev. iv. 10, II. 280 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS jyv a7a>yoj. There must be a purpose to mislead, in a writer who with this arrangement has a different meaning to ©foj at the end of the second, and at the beginning of the third clause. The want of the article is of no importance. For in the sixth verse of that chapter, and in numberless other places, ©fo? without the article is applied to God the Father. In the second passage, Jesus is called tcxuv tov @iov tov ao^atov. And in the third artaDyac/na trji fio|j;j, xaiX'^^^'^*]^ *'?5 vrtosra^f uj auTou, phrases which must be understood in a sense very far removed from the full import of the figure, unless they imply a sameness of nature. In the second passage, it is said that all things were made Si avtov, a phrase which might apply to a creature whom the Almighty chose to employ as his minister. But it is said in the same passage, that they were made »5 avrov, which signifies that he was much more than an instrument, and that his glory was an end for which things were made. It is said also, rtavta tv avtcf awiatfixe, which implies that his power is not occasional and precarious, but that he is able to preserve what he has made, and so may be an object of trust to his creatures. In the third passage, it is said that God made the worlds by the Son. But the quotation from the Psalms adduced in proof of this position, represents the Son as the Creator ; and as in no degree susceptible of the changes to which his works are subject. " Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands. Thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail." When you take, in conjunction with the strong probability that the Creator of the world is not a creature, the language of the Old Testa- ment, which makes creation the work of the true God, and the lan- guage of the New Testament, where creation is ascribed to Jesus, you discover the traces of a system which reconciles the apparent discordance. Jesus Christ is essentially God, always with the Father, united with him in nature, in perfections, in counsel, and in opera- tions.— " Whatsoever things the Father doth, these also doeth the Son likewise."* The Father acts by the Son, and the Son, in creating the world, displayed that power and Godhead which from eternity resided in him. If this system be true, then creation, the character- istical mark of the Almighty, may, in perfect consistency with the passages quoted from the Old Testament, be ascribed to Jesus, because, although the Father is said to have created the world by him, upon account of the union in all their operations, yet he is not a creature subservient to the will of another, but himself "the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth." This system is delivered in the earliest Christian writers. " The Father had no need," they say, " of the assistance of angels to make the things which he had deter- mined to be made ; for the Son and the Spirit are always with him, by whom and in whom he freely made all things, to whom he speaks when he says, Let us make man after our image ; and who are one with him, because it is added, So God created man in his own image."t • John V. 19. I Irenaeus, lib. iv. cap. 20, edit. Massuet. IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. igSl We require more evidence than we have yet attained, before we can pronounce that this system is true. You will only bear in mind, that it is suggested in all the passages of the New Testament, which give an account of the creation of the world by Jesus Christ ; and that if it shall appear to be supported by sufficient evidence, it recon- ciles that account with the natural impressions of the human mind, and the declarations of Scripture concerning the extent of power and the supremacy of character implied in the act of creation. 26* . o Q 282 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS CHAPTER V. ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. Jldministration of Providence. Those passages, from which we learnt that Jesus is the Creator of the world, taught us also to consider him as the Preserver of all the things which lie made. This last character implies a continued agency, and resolves all that care of Providence by which the creatures have been supported from the beginning, into actions performed by Jesus in a state of pre-existence. There is nothing in the ordinary course of nature which indicates the agency of this person ; there is no part of the principles of natural religion which requires that we should distinguish his agency from the power of the Almighty Father of all ; and therefore, the Scriptures, in speaking of those interpositions of Providence which respect the material world, and the life of the different animals, are not accustomed to direct our attention particu- larly to that Person, by whom the divine power is exerted. But they do intimate, that the particular economy of Providence, which respects the restoration of the human race, was administered in all ages by that Person, by whose manifestation it was accomplished : and upon these intimations is founded an opinion which, since the days of the apostles, has been held by almost every Christian writer who admits the pre-existence of Jesus, that he who in the fulness of time was made flesh, appeared to the patriarchs, gave the law from Mount Sinai, spake by the prophets, and maintained the whole of that intercourse with mankind, which is recorded in the Old Testa- ment as preparatory to the coming of the Messiah. The early date of this opinion, and the general consent with which it has been received, the frequent mention made of it in theological books, the uniformity which it gives to the conduct of the great plan of redemption, and the extent of that information which it promises to open, all conspire to draw our attention to it, and induce me to lay before you the grounds upon which it rests. They consist not of explicit declarations of Scripture, sufficient by themselves to establish the opinion, but of an induction of particulars, which, although they may escape careless readers, seem intended to unfold to those who search the Scriptures, a view both of that active love towards the human race which characterizes the Saviour of the world, and of the original dignity of his person. The general principles of this opinion are these. God, the Father, is represented in Scripture as " invisible, whom no man hath seen at IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 283 any time." But it is often said in the Old Testament that the patriarchs, the prophets, and the people saw God ; and there is an ease, a familiarity of intercourse in many of the scenes which are recorded, inconsistent with the awful majesty of him who covereth himself with thick clouds. The God of Israel, whom the people saw, is often called an angel, i. e. a person sent ; therefore he cannot be God the Father, for it is impossible that the Father should be sent by any one. But he is also called Jehovah. The highest titles, the most exalted actions, and the most entire reverence are appropriated to him. Therefore he cannot be a being of an inferior order. And the only method in which we can reconcile the seeming discordance is, by supposing that he is the Son of God, who, as we learn from John, " was in the beginning with God, and Avas God," who being at a particular time " made flesh," and so manifested in the human nature, may be conceived, without irreverence, to have manifested himself at former times in different ways. This supposition, suggested by the language of the Old Testament, seems to be confirmed by the words of our Lord, John vi. 46, " Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father," and of his apostle, John i. 18, " No man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." The meaning of this passage extends to the former declarations of God under the Old Testament. For it is remarkable, that it is not the preterperfect tense which is used in the original, but the aorist, which intimates that he, " who is in the bosom of the Father, hath declared him" also in times past. He who alone was qualified to declare God, who certahily did declare him by the Gospel, and who is styled by the apostle, "the image of the invisible God," as the person in whom the glory of the Godhead appeared to man, seems to be pointed out as the angel who was called by the name of God in ancient times. These general principles receive a striking illustration when we attend to the detail of the appearances recorded in the Old Testament, because we find upon examination that all the divine appearances made in a succession of ages, are referred to one person, who is often called in the same passage, both Angel and Jehovah, and that several incidental expressions in the New Testament mark out Christ to be this person. Section I. ALL APPEARANCES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT REFERRED t6 ONE PERSON, CALLED ANGEL AND GOD. In the eighteenth chapter of Genesis, it is said that " the Lord," which, when written in capital letters, is always the translation of Jehovah, that '•' Jehovah appeared unto Abraham in the plains of Mamre ;" and the manner of the appearance is very particularly related. " Abraham lifted up his eyes, and three men stood by him." He received them hospitably, according to the manners of the times. 284 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS In the course of the interview, one of the three speaks with the authority of God, promises such blessings as God only can bestow, and is called by the historian Jehovah. Two of the men departed and " went toward Sodom, but Abraham," it is said, " stood yet be- fore the Lord." He inquires of him respectfully about the fate of Sodoni ; he reasons with him as the Judge of all the earth, who has it in his power to save and to destroy ; and we may judge of the impressions which he now has of the nature of the man, whom a little before he had received in his tent, when he says to him, " Be- hold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, who am but dust and ashes." It is the same Lord, whom Abraham saw in this manner, that appeared to him at other times, and, after his death, to his son Isaac; for a reference is made in thg future appearances to the promise that had been made at this time. To Jacob, the grandson of Abraham, the Lord appeared upon different occasions, under the name of the God of Abraham and Isaac, i. e. the God who had bless- ed them ; he repeats to Jacob what he had said to them, that his posterity should possess the land of Canaan, and become a great nation, and that in his seed all the families of the earth should be blessed, xxviii. 13, 14. Jacob, after one appearance, said, « I have seen God face to face," xxxii. 30 ; after another, " Surely the Lord is in this place, and he called the name of the place Bethel," i. e. the house of God, xxvhi. 16—19. He raised a pillar; he vowed a vow to the God whom he had seen, and at his return he paid the vow. Yet this God, to whom he gave these divine honours, and of whom he spoke at some times as Jehovah the God of Abraham and Isaac, at other times he calls an angel. " The angel of God," he says, "spake unto me in a dream, saying, I am the God of Bethel," xxxi. 11 — 13; and upon his death-bed he gives in the same sentence the name of God and angel to this person, xlviii. 15. "He blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads." The pro- phet Hosea refers in one plaee to the earnestness with which Jacob begged a blessing from the Lord who appeared to him, which is called in Genesis his wrestling with a man and prevailing. So says Hosea, xii. 2—S. " By his strength he had power with God, yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed ; he found him in Bethel, and there he spake with us, even the Lord God of hosts, the Lord is his memorial." The same person is called in this passage God, the angel, and the Lord God of hosts. In Exodus iii. we read, that Avhen Moses came to Horeb, " the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. Moses turned about to see this sight, "And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face ; for he was afraid to look upon God. And the Lord said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and I am come down to deliver them, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land. Come now, therefore, and I will se)id thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people." You will IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 2S5 observe in this passage an interchange of the names angel and God, a reference to the former appearances which the patriarchs had seen, and a connexion estabhshed between this appearance and the subse- quent manifestations to the children of Israel; so that the person whom Abraham saw in the plains of Mam-e, and who brought Israel out of Egypt, is declared to be the same. Moses asks the name by which he should call the God who had thus come down to deliver the children of Israel. " And God said, I am that I am : thou shall say to the children of Israel, I am hath sent me unto you." This very particular mode of expression is intended to be the interpretation of Jehovah, the incommunicable name of God, implying his necessary, eternal, and unchangeable existence. Other beings may be, or may not be. There was a time when they were not : the will of him who called them into existence may annihilate them ; and even while they con- tinue to exist, there may be such alterations upon the manner of their being, as to make them appear totally difterent from what they once were. But God always was, and always will be, that which he now is : and the name which distinguishes him from every other being, and is truly expressive of his character, is this, fycottpocoj-. It is very remarkable that in the same passage in which the person who appeared to Moses assumed this significant phrase as his name, he is called by the historian, the angel of the Lord; and Stephen, Acts vii. 30, 35, in relating this history before the Jewish Sanhedrim, shows the sense of his countrymen upon this point, by repeating twice the word an^el. " There appeared to Moses in the wilderness of Mount Sinai anlmgel of the Lord in a flame of fire." And again, " This Moses did God send to be a ruler and deliverer by the hands of the angel which appeared to him in the bush." Stephen says most accurately that Moses was sent to be a ruler and deliverer by the hands of this angel ; for it was the same angel who appeared to him in the bush ; that put a rod in his hand wherewith to do wonders before Pharaoh ; that brought forth the people with an out-stretched arm, and led them through the wilderness. Accordingly, Exod. xiii. 21, we read " The Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, and by night in a pillar of fire." In the next chapter, xiv. 19, we read, " The angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them." The same Jehovah who led them out of Egypt gave them the law from Mount Sinai ; for we read, Exod. XX. 'l, 2, " I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Our atten- tion is thus carried back by the preface of the law to that appearance which Moses had seen ; and accordingly Stephen says, Acts vii. 38, " Moses was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the Mount Sinai." An angel then spake to Moses in Mount Sinai, yet this angel in giving the law takes to himself the name of Jehovah. The first commandment is, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me :" and Moses when he recites in Deuteronomy the manner of giving the law, says expressly, that God had given it ; iv. 33, 36, 39, " Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire as thou hast heard, and live ? Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice, that he might instruct thee ; and thou heardest his words out of the midst of the fire. Know, therefore. 286 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS this day, and considei" it in thine heart, that the Lord he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath, there is none else." All the interpositions recorded in the Pentateuch, by which the enemies of the children of Israel were put to flight, and the people were safely conducted to the land of Canaan, are referred to the same person, who is often called the angel of the Lord that went before them. Moses, who begins the blessing which he pronounced upon the children of Israel before his death with these words, Deut, xxxiii. " The Lord came from Mount Sinai," seems to intend to connect the lirst appearance, which this Lord made to him in Horeb, with every subsequent manifestation of divine favour, when, in speaking of Joseph, he calls the blessing of God for which he prays, " the good will of him that dwelt in the bush." During a succession of ages all the affairs of the Jewish nation were administered with the attention and tenderness which might be expected from a tutelary deity, or guardian angel, to whom that province was specially committed ; and the prophet Isaiah has expressed that protection amidst danger, that support and relief in all their distresses, which the people had experienced from his guardianship, in these beautiful words, Isaiah Ixiii. 7, 9 : "I will mention the loving-kindnesses of the Lord, and the praises of the Lord, according to all the great goodness towards the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them. In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them : in his love and in his pity he redeemed them, and he bare them and carried them all the days of old." Yet we are guarded in other places against de2;radinsr the God of Israel to a level with the inferior deities to whom the nations offered their worship. " Where are their Gods," says the Lord by Moses, Deut. xxxii. 36 — 40, "their rock in whom they trusted ? See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no God with me : For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say I live for ever." And Isaiah xliv. 6. " Thus saith the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts, I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no God." This is the language in which the God of .Israel speaks of himself, and in which he is addressed by the people through all the books of the Old Testament ; and in the long address- es, several of which are recorded, the high characters which distin- guish the true God are conjoined with the manifestations in former times, of which I have been giving the history, in such a manner as to show that both are applied to the same Person. One of the most striking examples is the solemn thanksgiving and prayer olTered, Nehemiah, ch. ix. by all the congregation of Israel, who returned from the Babylonish captivity, in consequence of the edict of Cyrus the Great. " Thou, even thou, art Lord alone ; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the sea, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all, and the host of heaven worshippeth thee. Thou art the Lord, the God who didst choose Abraham, — and madest a covenant with him, — and didst see the affliction of our fathers in Egypt, — and didst divide the sea before them, — and leddest them in the day by a cloudy pillar, and in the night by a pillar of fire. Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, — yea, forty years didst thou sustain them in the wilderness," &c. There IN HIS PKE-EXISTENT STATE. 287 is no interruption, no change of person in the progress of this prayer, so that we must suppose a delusion to run through the whole of the Old Testament, unless the Creator of heaven and earth be the same Person whom Jacob, and Moses, and Isaiah, and Stephen call the Angel of the Lord. In order to connect all the intimations which the Old Testament gives concerning the God of Israel, you must carry this along with you, that the person who appeared to Moses, and who gave the law from Mount Sinai, commanded the people to make him a sanctuary, that he might dwell amongst them. The command was given to Moses at the time when he went up into the midst of the cloud that abode upon Mount Sinai, and when the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the Mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. At this time Moses received from God the pattern of the ark of the tabernacle, and of the mercy-seat on the top of the ark, having cherubims which covered the mercy-seat with their wings, and looked towards one another. " Thou shalt put," said God, " the mercy-seat above upon the ark, and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee. And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy-seat, from be- tween the two cherubims, of all things which I will give thee in com- mandment to the children of Israel." Exod. xxv. 21. As soon as the tabernacle was reared, and the ark with these appurtenances was brought into it, " a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle." This cloud was the guide of the children of Israel in their journeyings. When the cloud was taken up from the tabernacle, they went on ; when it was not taken up, they rested; and you may judge how intimately they connected the appearance of the ark with the presence of God, from the words recorded. Numb. x. 35, 36, as used by Moses in the name of the con- gregation. The ark of the Lord, it is said, went before them. " And when it set forward, Moses said. Rise np. Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee, flee before thee. And when it rested, he said, " Return, 0 Lord, unto the many thousands of Israel." Wheresoever the ark was, the God of Israel was con- ceived to be. In that place, he met with his people. There they consulted him in all their exigencies ; and the glory which filled the tabernacle, called the Schechinah, was the visible symbol of the pre- sence of the God of Israel. When Solomon built a temple, he intro- duced into it the ark and the tabernacle. And the joy which he felt in accomplishing that work, arose from his having found a fixed habitation for that sacred pledge of the divine favour which had often been exposed to danger, which had for some time been in the pos- session of the enemy, but which every devout Israelite regarded as the glory and the security of his nation. In Psalm cxxxii. which appears to have been composed to celebrate the introduction of the ark into the temple, you find these words: " Arise, 0 Lord, into thy rest, thou, and the ark of thy strength. The Lord hath chosen Zion ; he hath desired it for his habitation. This is my rest for ever; here will I dwell." In the solemn prayer of Solomon, at the dedication of the temple, 1 Kings vi. it is declared to be a house built for the Lord God of Israel, who had made a covenant with their fathers, when he 288 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS brought them out of the land of Egypt. As soon as the ark was brought mto its place in the temple, the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord. To this place all the prayers and services of the people in succeeding generations were directed. The Lord was known by this name, Jehovah the God of Israel, who dwelleth be- tween the cherubims. And hence arises the significancy of that prayer of the good king Jehoshaphat, when he stood in the house of the Lord before the new court, 2 Chron. xx. 7, 8. " 0 Lord God of our fathers, art not thou our God who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend for ever ? and they dwelt therein, and have built thee a sanctuary therein, for thy name." These circumstances also explain to us various expressions in the book of Psalms, which, without attending to them, appear unintelli- gible. The Psalms were the hymns composed for the service of the temple. The particular occasions upon which several of them were composed, are mentioned in the Old Testament history. And many of them have a special reference to that principle which was incor- porated into the very constitution of the Jewish state, that the peculiar residence of the God of Israel was in the ark, and that his presence was manifested by a visible glory encompassed with clouds, and shining sometimes with a dazzling splendour which none could ap- proach ; sometimes with a milder lustre which encouraged the ser- vants of the sanctuary to draw nigh. Ps. Ixxvi. 1. '' In Judah is God known : his name is great in Israel. In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling in Zion." Ps. xcix. 1. "The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble : He sitteth between the cherubims, let the earth be moved." Many of the Psalms, by their reference to events in the history of the Jewish nation, show us that the God who was worshipped in the sanctuary, is the same who made a covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who appeared on Mount Sinai, and led his people like a tlock by the hand of Moses and Aaron. Psalms Ixxviii. cv. and cvi. contain an historical detail, and Psalm Ixviii. confirms in a striking manner the glory in which God appeared in the sanctuary with his former manifestations to Israel. " 0 God, when thou wentest forth before thy people ; when thou didst march through the wilderness, the earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God : Even Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel. They have seen thy goings, 0 God, my king, in the sanctuary. Because of thy temple at Jerusalem, shall kings bring presents to thee. 0 God, thou art terrible out of thy holy places." While the Psalms thus bring together the former events in the history of Israel, and the glory of their God in the sanctuary, they address this person as Jehovah, the Lord of hosts, who made the world and the fulness thereof, the mighty God, the king and judge of all the earth, whom the angels worship, and who alone is to be feared. The view of the information contained in the Scriptures of the Old Testament concerning the person by whom the law was given, will be complete when it is added, in the last place, that the writings of the later prophets represent him also as the Saviour of Israel, and the author of a new dispensation, which was to be introduced in the last IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 289 days. The interposition of the God of Israel, to deliver them out of the many national calamities which mark their history, do by no means exhaust the meaning of the prophecies and thanksgivings, which abound in the sacred books of the Jews. The expressions even of the earlier writers bear a more exalted sense, than is attained by explaining them of any temporal mercies. And about the time of the captivity of the nation, and of their return to their own land, the prophets, in some places, speak plainly of a spiritual deliverance, and in others adopt a richness of imagery, which is unmeaning and even ridiculous, unless it be understood to point to the days of the Messiah. But the clearest intimations of the future glorious dispensation are always conjoined with the mention of its being accomplished by that very person who was the God of Israel. Isaiah sometimes represents the Almighty as himself the Saviour and Redeemer of Israel ; at other times, he speaks of a servant, an elect of God, who was to be mighty to save. But this elect is distinguished by such names, Immanuel, i. e. God with us, the mighty God, the Prince of peace ; and his character and appearance are described with such majesty, that we soon recognise the God of Israel, for whom the people are commanded to wait. Later prophets give the name of Jehovah to the person who was to be employed in bringing the salvation. Zech. ii. 10, 11. " Sing and rejoice, 0 daughter of Zion, for lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord. And thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee." Here is one Jehovah sending another to dwell in Judah. " I will have mercy upon the house of Judah," Hosea i. 7, "and will save them by the Lord their God." Micah V. 2, foretells a " ruler in Israel that was to come out of Bethle- hem," not a new person, but one " whose goings forth have been of old, from everlasting." Jeremiah says expressly that the new covenant with Israel was to be made by the same person who had made the old. Jer. xxxi. 31. "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah ; not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel. After those days saith, the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people." In reference to the covenant mentioned by Jeremiah, Malachi, the last of the pro- phets, announces the coming of the Messiah in these words, Mai. iii. 1 : " Behold I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me : And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in ; behold he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts." The Lord coming to his own temple is the God of Israel returning to illuminate and glorify by his presence that Jewish temple, which had been originally built for his name, but which, after the destruction of the fabric erected by Solomon, had been left without the Shechinah, the visible symbol of his presence. By his coming, the glory of the latter house, according to the prophecy of Haggai,* was made greater than the glory of the • Hagg. u. 9. 27 2 R 290 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS former, because no symbol, however sacred or splendid, deserved to be compared with the actual presence, and inhabitation of the Lord of glory. The Lord coming to his own temple is called in this pro- phecy the Angel or Messenger of the covenant, in whom the Jews delighted, i. e. a person sent by another for the purpose of making that new covenant with the house of Israel, which their sacred books taught them to expect. Here, then, we are brought back, at the end of the Old Testament, to the same word Angel or Messenger, which we found at the beginning of it. The Angel, who had appeared to Abraham, to Jacob, and to Moses, who had made the old covenant with Israel, who had been worshipped in his own temple at Jerusa- lem, is here caMljd the Angel of the covenant which was to be established upon better promises. The conjunction of names in this concluding prophecy collects all the information concerning this per- son, which we have found scattered through the Old Testament, and seems to be introduced on purpose to teach us, that he who had con- ducted the former dispensation was to open the new ; that the same person, by whom the whole plan of Divine Providence respecting the souls of men had been carried on from the beginning of the world, was to visit the Jewish temple before it was demolished a second time ; and having received the adoration of that people whom he had chosen in the temple, which was his own during all the time that it stood, was to be entitled by another manifestation, and a fresh dis- play of his love, to adorations and thanksgivings corresponding to the nature and extent of the blessings conveyed by the new covenant. This singular prophecy, which collects all the information concern- ing the person of whom we have been speaking, is found in the con- clusion of the Old Testament ; and in the beginning of the New, it is applied by Mark to Jesus Christ. This application is a favourable omen of the success to be expected in the second part of this discussion, in which I propose to show, that, as all the divine appearances made in a succession of ages are referred in the Old Testament to one person, who is called both Angel and Jehovah, so many incidental expressions in the New Testament mark out Christ to be this person. Section II. There is no passage in the New Testament which directly affirms that every thing said in the Old Testament of that Person who is called both Angel and Jehovah belongs to Christ. But this is not the only instance in which the intimate connexion between the two dis- pensations is left to be gathered by those who inquire. There are many parts of the counsel of God, with respect to which, as the Apostle speaks, to those whose minds are blinded, the veil remains untaken away in reading the Old Testament. And it does not appear unworthy of the wisdom of God to have provided in this way a reward for that industry which is directed to the Scriptures, a satisfac- tion to speculative minds, and an increase of the evidence of Chris- IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 291 tianity, according to the progress which men make in sacred know- ledge. In the progress of this part of the discussion, you will have a speci- men of what the Apostle calls " comparing spiritual things with spiritual," in order to "know the things that are freely given us of God." You will find the proof consisting of a number of detached circumstances. But you will not, upon that account, think it incom- plete. Circumstantial evidence is often resorted to in human affairs. There are many occasions upon which it is not judged worthy of less credit than the most direct testimony ; and, with regard to the parti- cular object of this discussion, if we are attentive and patient in the interpretation of Scripture, the sentiments of the apostles, whose writ- ings are the standard of our faith, may be as certainly known from the manner in which they have expressed themselves at many differ- ent times, as if any of them had judged it proper formally to show that Christ is the Jehovah who appeared to the patriarchs, who was worshipped in the temple, and who was announced as the author of a new dispensation. In collecting the evidence of this whole proposition, it is natural to invert the order in which I brought forward the different parts of it. For Christ is known in the New Testament as the author of the new dispensation. That is the character under which we find him there. The first thing, therefore, to be derived from thence, is an answer to this question, whether the terms in which the author of the new dis- pensation was announced under the Old Testament are applied to Christ in the New. If they are, we should be warranted to infer, from the induction of particulars formerly stated, that he was also worship- ped in the temple, and that he appeared to the patriarchs. But our faith in the whole proposition will be very much confirmed, if, inde- pendently of proof of the second and third facts which necessarily arises from the proof of the third, we find them also established by separate evidence. 1. It appears from various expressions in the New Testament, that Christ is Jehovah, the Saviour of Israel, who was announced in the Old Testament as the author of a new dispensation. The allusions that occur in the New Testament to expressions in the Old respecting the Saviour of Israel, are infinite in number, and constitute a striking illustration of this part of the general proposition. But there are two heads under which we may arrange those passages, which af!brd the most conclusive proof that Christ is the person who was thus announced. The first is the application made in the New Testament of the prophecies respecting the forerunner of Jehovah, the Saviour of Israel ; and the second is a number of quotations, from a long prophecy of Isaiah, that extends from the seventh to the twelfth chapter. 1. Application of the prophecies respecting the forerunner of Jeho- vah, the Saviour of Israel. The first two verses of Mark's Gospel are these ; " The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God ; As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee;" and the same prophecy is applied in Matthew and Luke to John Baptist. The words are taken, with a small variation, from Malachi iii. 1. 292 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS III the prophet, the person whose messenger was to prepare the way before him speaks, " Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall pre- pare the way before me.'' In the gospels, the Almighty speaks to the person, whose way the messenger was to prepare. " I send my messenger before thy face." As the passage is literally the same in all three gospels, the variation from the present reading of the Old Testament was probably occasioned by some version or copy of the Hebrew, different from any now extant. The amount of the pro- phecy is the same, and the fulfilment equally exact, whether you read " before me," or "before thee; "and the direct application to John the Baptist of the first part of the verse in Malachi, is a clear warrant to apply the second part of the verse to Jesus, the person before whom John went, i. e. to consider Jesus as Jehovah coming to his own temple, the messenger of the covenant, whom the Jews were taught by the later prophets to expect. This inference, legitimately drawn from the use made of the first part of the verse in Malachi, is established by that quotation which immediately follows in Mark, and which is adopted by the other Evangelists in the beginning of the gospels. " The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. This is the account which John gave of himself when the Jews sent to him, asking, " Who art thou? 1 am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias." The quotation is taken from the fortieth chapter of Isaiah, the first eleven verses of which are an account of the nature and the manner of that salvation which the God of Israel was to bring. When you recollect the language which John uniformly employed with regard to himself, " I am not the Christ, but I am sent before him ; that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come, baptizing with water ;" and when you find the inspired historians agreeing with John him- self in applying to him this prophecy of Isaiah, you have no doubt that Jesus is the Lord, whose way the voice was to prepare ; and you are directed to apply to Jesus all the expressions employed in that passage to characterize the person before whom the voice went, i.e. you will find, upon reading these eleven verses of Isaiah, that you are taught by this application of one of them to consider Jesus as Je- hovah, the God of Israel, who came himself, with a strong hand, to be their Saviour, and their Shepherd. Accordingly, the angel, in the first chapter of Luke's gospel, thus announces to Zachariah the birth of John ; " Many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God ; and he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Ellas, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord," referring, in this annunciation, to the prophecies, both of Isaiah and Malachi : and our Lord, by taking to himself the name of the good shepherd, and by frequently calling his disciples his flock, his sheep, and his lambs, plainly refers to these words of the fortieth chapter of Isaiah, " He shall feed his flock like a shepherd ; he shall gather the lambs with his arm." But as all the parts of that prophecy mark one person whom the voice was to announce, if this expression belong to him, the rest belong also. II. The other head, under which I proposed to arrange those ex- pressions, which afford the most conclusive proof that Jesus is the IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 293 person who was announced in the Old Testament, as Jehovah, the Saviour of Israel, is a number of quotations from a long prophecy in Isaiah, that extends from the seventh to the twelfth chapter. The kings of Syria and Israel had combined against the kingdom of Judah, and they threatened to dethrone Ahaz,the king, and to raise a stranger to rule over the house of David. The prophet is sent to comfort the king and the people, by giving them assurance of the stability of tho kingdom of Judah, and of deliverance from their present enemies. The prophecy has an immediate reference to the circumstances of the kingdom. But you find, upon reading it, such a mixture as is not uncommon in the Old Testament prophecies. You meet with ex- pressions which seem to look far beyond the events of which the prophet is speaking, names and epithets which cannot, without a striking impropriety, be applied to any person born about that time, but which are a natural description of the character and office of that illustrious descendant of David, whom former prophecies had an- nounced, and whose everlasting dominion is introduced into this pro- phecy of a temporal deliverance, as the most entire security that the designs of the enemies of Judah must fail, because the counsels of heaven did not admit of any interruption in the lineal succession to that crown, which was to flourish for ever upon the head of the Mes- siah. This is the train of thought by which the promises of temporal and of spiritual deliverance are blended together in this message to the king of Judah. It is not easy to separate them from one another, and some of the expressions are so dark, that in order to form a just con- ception of their meaning, you will find it necessary to call in the assistance of some of the many authors by whom they have been illustrated. You will derive particular advantage from reading one of Bishop Kurd's Lectures, in which a part of this prophecy is eluci- dated with the clearness and accuracy which distinguish this master of sacred criticism. It is also fully illustrated by Macculloch. Even although you should not follow the prophet in all the changes of sub- ject, or assign the precise meaning of every expression, you are led by a general acquaintance with the language of the Old Testament prophecies to consider many of the names that occur in this prophecy as descriptive of the Messiah ; and you find the apostles of our Lord making the application to him. Matthew, in relating the miraculous conception of our Lord, as announced by the angel to Mary, says, " Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call his name Em- manuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." This is taken from Isaiah vii. 14, and being applied to Jesus, we are taught that he is God with us, the Jehovah of Israel, who, according to the promise by Zechariah, was to come and dwell in the midst of them.* The Word was God, and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us. The angel who appeared to Mary said, hi the first chapter of Luke, " Thou shalt bring forth a Son, and shalt call his name Jesus : And he shall be great, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David ; and he shall reign over the house of • 2echar. ii. 10, 11. 27* 294 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS Jacob for ever and ever : and of his kingdom there shall be no end." There is a reference here both to Isaiah vii. 14, and also to Isaiah ix. 6, " Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given ; and the govern- ment shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called Won- derful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be 410 end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order and to establish it for ever." Jesus, then, being, according to this application of the prophecy, that Son of David who was to sit for ever on the throne of his Father, is also the mighty God. In another part of this prophecy, Isaiah calls this Son " a rod out of the stem of Jesse," and " a branch out of his roots, which should stand as an ensign to the people, and to which the Gentiles should seek." And the Apostle Paul, in the course of an argument to show that Jesus Christ not only fulfilled the promises made to the fathers, but was given also that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy, applies these words to him, Rom. xv. 12 : "And again Esaias saith. There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gen- ti\es, in him shall the Gentiles trust." Allusions to other expressions of this prophecy are to be found in the writings of the apostles. But the direct quotations which have been made are sufficient to show that, in their eyes, Jesus Christ is that Saviour of Israel whom the prophet, from the beginning to the end of the spiritual part of the prophecy, announces. That Person, according to the prophet, is Je- hovah the God of Israel. Therefore we have the authority of the inspired books of the New Testament for the truth of the third part of our general proposition. It is true that he is often styled in the New Testament a man sent, given, raised up by God to be the Saviour of the world. It is said that he received power of God; that the Spirit was given him; that he came to do his Father's will. And this language may seem to be inconsistent with his being Jehovah. But you will recollect that we meet with the same inconsistency in the Old Testament. The ancient Scriptures speak of the Saviour of Israel as Jehovah sent by Jehovah, himself the mighty God, the everlasting Father, and as a Son born of a virgin. It is by this peculiar manner of designation that we dis- tinguish him in the Old Testament from God the Father. When we find the same peculiarity in the New Testament, we are confirmed in the application which we have made ; and Jesus the Saviour must be the Jehovah, who was to come and save Israel, because, like him, he is called both the messenger of God, and God. II. The second part of the general proposition is, that Jesus is the Person who was worshipped in the temple at Jerusalem, and whose glory filled the tabernacle. It might be sufficient to rest the proof of this upon the prophecy of Malachi. The same Person is there called the Lord coming to his own temple, and the messenger of the covenant. But Jesus is unquestionably the messenger of the covenant. There- fore the temple to which he came was his, and it could not without impiety be called his, unless he was worshipped there. This proof is confirmed by many analogies, and by some express intimations in the New Testament. The analogies are of this kind. Jesus is called the effulgence of IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 295 the Father's glory. John says, isxrivu,rssv, he tabernacled amongst us, and iOio-saniOa Solov avfov, we Contemplated his glory ; a phraseology most natural in a Jew, who considered the Shechinah as the visible symbol of the divine presence, if he also believed that the Person, who had exhibited that symbol for many ages in the temple, became by his incarnation an inhabitant of earth. His body was a tabernacle which veiled the glory of his presence in such a manner as to make it safe for mortals, emrsaoOai, to look steadily for some time upon it. There is one occasion, indeed, recorded in the gospels, when this glory burst forth so as to overpower the beholders. Upon a mount to which Jesus led three of his disciples, " he was transfigured before them, and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as snow, and a bright cloud overshadowed them," This is called by Peter, when relating this vision, ,uf yoxort^frt*-? So^a, the transcendant glory. The veil which usually concealed the majesty of the God- head from the sight of the disciples was for a moment dropped, and their senses were astonished with an effulgence, such as filled the tabernacle at those times when it was unsafe even for the sons of Aaron to enter. This appearance, however transitory, was fitted to mark out Jesus to those who were permitted to behold it as the Lord of glory ; and it is stated by the apostle as the pledge of that glory in which he is now enthroned, and in which he shall come to judge the world, 2 Peter i. 16, 17. " We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye-witnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glor^^, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, when we were with him in the holy mount." The new Jerusalem is thus described by John. " Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them. The glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." Rev. xxi. 3, 23. It is said that Jesus shall come at the last day, tv rtv^t ^-Koyoi : And that he shall destroy the man of sin, Tf] iTit^avsia trii ra^ovriiai av-tov, with the manifestation of his presence, 2 Thess. ii. S. All this language of the New Testament is borrowed from the Shechinah. And it will appear most proper and significant, when you consider Jesus, whose glory enlightens heaven, whose brightness dazzled the eyes of the disciples on the mount, and whose excellence might be contemplated when it shone "' full of grace and truth" through the veil of his flesh, as the Lord of the temple, whose presence had formed both the more awful and the more encouraging appearances of the Shechinah. Analogies of this kind, when they are frequent and striking, constitute a very satisfying evidence to those who are capable of tracing them. But as they may be abused, it is always desirable to have them supported by some direct proofs of which the judgment may lay hold, without the aid of imagination. The direct proofs of the point suggested by these analogies, are of two kinds. The first consists of quotations applied to Jesus from those Psalms in which the glory of the Jehovah of Israel in his temple is described. The second is the testimony of the Apostle John. 1. The Psalms were hymns composed for the service of the temple ; and several of them were mentioned formerly in proof of this position, that the Person worshipped in the temple was the same who had 296 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS appeared to the patriarchs. But several expressions in these very Psahns are applied by the apostles to Christ. We read in Psalm Ixviii. " This is the hill which God desireth to dwell in. They have seen thy goings, 0 God, my king, in thy sanctuary." But the apostle, Eph. iv, 8, when speaking of the gift of Christ, quotes in proof of it, the 18th verse of this Psalm : " Wherefore he saitli, when he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men ; and he argues that the propriety of the expression, " he ascended," arises from this, that the same person who ascended had first descended. Now one person is addressed or spoken of from the beginning to the end of the Psalm. It is impossible that at the 18th verse there can be an abrupt address to Christ, without any intimation that the per- son addressed is different from him mentioned in the 17th verse, and spoken of in the sequel. We have, therefore, the authority of the Apostle Paul for applying the whole of Psalm Ixviii. to Jesus, so that we may say of him, as in the 29th verse, " Because of thy temple at Jerusalem shall kings bring presents to thee." Again, the apostle to the Hebrews derived one proof that Jesus was originally superior to angels from the command given them to worship him. But this command is found in Psalm xcvii. where the majesty of the God of Israel is described in his temple. " The Lord reigneth. Clouds and darkness are round about him. A fire goeth before him. Con- founded be all they that serve graven images ; worship him, all ye gods, or angels. Zion heard, and was glad." The command is introduced in a manner which plainly distinguishes the person to be worshipped from idols, and marks him to be the God of Israel. He then, whom the apostle to the Hebrews calls the first begotten, is the same who in Judah " was high above all the earth." Once more, the apostle derives his proof that Christ created the world from a passage in Psalm cii. But we cannot consider these words as addressed by the Psalmist to Christ, without admitting that he is the person mentioned in the former part of the psalm. And the reasoning of the apostle is inconclusive and sophistical, unless the person of whom he is speaking in that chapter be the same of whom the Psalmist is speaking in that psalm, i. e. the God who was worshipped in Zion, the Saviour of Israel, who was to appear in his glory, and whose praise was to be declared in Jerusalem, when he built up Zion. 2. The argument founded upon these quotations is confirmed by the express testimony of John xii. 41. The evangelist, speaking of the many miracles which were performed by Jesus before the Jews, but which had not the effect of leading them to believe on him, quotes a passage from the sixth chapter of Isaiah, in which the unbelief of the Jews is foretold ; and then he subjoins, — " These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory and spake of him." When you read that chapter of Isaiah, you will find a most awful and ma- jestic description of the glory of the Almighty in the temple, not that cloud which encouraged the priests to draw near, but that bright refulgent glory which no man could see and live. " I saw," says Isaiah, " the Lord sitting upon a throne, liigh and lifted up ; and his train filled the temple." The expression in the Septuagint is, Ttxri^rii I ciKoj tjjj fiolrj aui'ov. This was shown in the vision to Isaiah before IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 297 the date of the long prophecy to which I formerly referred, as if to qualify the prophet for receiving that extraordinary communication of the spiritual deliverance prepared for his people. But he felt the weakness of humanity in this manifestation of the glory of the Lord. " Wo is me," he said, " for I am undone ; for mine eyes have seen the king, the Lord of hosts." Now that which Isaiah saw is called by John his glory, i. e. according to the context, the glory of Christ. Therefore Christ is the Lord of hosts, whose glory filled the temple. In order to evade the force of this evident conclusion, those who deny the pre-existence and the divinity of Christ have adopted the paraphrase of Dr. Clarke. " The true meaning,-"" he says, " is, when Esaias saw the glory of God the Father revealing to him the coming of Christ, he then saw the glory of him wiio was to come in the glory of his Father. Esaias in beholding the glory of God, and in receiving from him a revelation of the coming of Christ, saw, that is, foresaw the glory of Christ just as Abraham saw, i. e. foresaw his day and was glad."* You may judge of the influence which attachment to system has upon the most acute and enlightened minds, when such a man as Dr. Clarke could do such violence to words in this short sentence of John. He considers saw as equivalent to foresaic, although neither Isaiah nor John intimate that the objects presented to the prophet's sight were a prophecy of future events ; and he con- siders his glory, i. e. the glory of Christ, as equivalent to the glory of God revealing to him the coming of Christ at the end of the world. I should rather say that his interpretation gives a double meaning to each of the words, "8f triv ho^av avtov. He saw the glory of God, and he foresaw the glory of Christ. III. One part of the general proposition still remains. That Christ is the person who appeared to the patriarchs, and gave the law. We are entitled to consider this as an inference from the points already proved. For Christ having been found to be the Saviour of Israel, who was worshipped in the temple, he must, according to the induction stated in the former section, be the same who appeared to the patriarchs, and who gave the law from Mount Sinai. But we are not obliged to have recourse to this mode of proof. Even of this last point, seemingly the most remote from the gospel, the New Testa- ment contains separate evidence ; for there are many expressions in the New Testament, af which this part of the proposition gives the most natural interpretation, and there are others which require the belief of it. Of the first kind are the following : When our Lord says, John viii. 59, "Abraham saw my day, and was glad;" the words will appear most significant, if Christ was the person who appeared to Abraham. When Peter says, 1 Pet. i. 10,. 11, "The prophets prophesied of the grace which should come, searching what the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, did signify," he seems to say that Christ spake by the prophets ; and when he says, in the same Epistle, " Christ was quickened," /. e. raised from the dead "in the spirit, by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison, which sometimes were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing," all the • Clarke's Works, vol. iv. No. 597. 2 S 298 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS Other meanings which have been affixed to these obscure words, appear forced and unnatural, when compared with this, that Christ is Jehovah, who said before the flood, " My spirit shall not always strive with man, yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years," and who, during this time of forbearance, raised up Noah, a preacher of righteousness. Once more, when our Lord says, Matth. xxni. 37, " 0 Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would 1 have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" if you consider our Lord as the person who had carried the Jews in the days of old, who had sent prophets, and by a mixture of mercies and chastisements, had called them to repentance, this lamentation over Jerusalem has a con- sistency, a beauty, and an energy, which are very much lost, by sup- posing that his peculiar care of them only began with his manifesta- tion in the flesh. It is plain that all these passages derive much light and improve- ment from admitting that Jesus is the person who appeared to the patriarchs and gave the law. But there are other passages in the New Testament, the sense of which obviously requires the truth of this part of the proposition. The Apostle, 1 Cor. x. 4, in applying the history of the children of Israel as an example and warning to Christians, has these words: "They drank of that spiritual rock that fallowed them, and that rock was Christ." The part of Jewish his- tory to which the Apostle refers, is thus related. Psalm Ixxviii. 15, 16, "He clave the rocks in the wilderness, and gave them drink as out of the great depths. He brought streams also out of the rock." In grateful remembrance of this seasonable exertion of divine power, God is often called in the Old Testament the Rock of Israel ; so Psalm Ixxviii. 35, it is said, " They remembered that God was their rock, and the High God their Redeemer." Now the Apostle says, that the spiritual rock that followed, i. e. went along with them in their journey, was Christ. His power brought water out of the rock, and the same power continued to defend and guide them. Again, 1 Cor. X. 9, the Apostle, continuing to draw a lesson to Christians from the history of the Israelites, says, " Neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents." We read, Deut. vi. 16, "Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him in Massah." And here the Apostle substitutes Christ in place of the Lord their God. The Greek runs thus, Mj^Ss sxrtst^a^co^Ev 'iov'K^ia'tov,xo,9i^i XM tivti avtwiHiie.a-'ia.v. It has been well observed that the particles xa^uj xat, require us to repeat after fTtn^acrav the same accusatives which had followed «xrt£i^afw,ii£v: and almost all the MSS. and the most ancient versions agree with the earliest writers who quote this passage in reading x^wfoi' as the first accusative. The 18th verse of Psalm Ixviii. which I mentioned formerly as quoted by the apostle to the Ephesians, and applied to Christ, immediately fol- lows another verse of that Psalm, in which are these words, — " The Lord is among them in the holy place, as in Sinai ;" so that the same person who ascended on high was in Sinai : and accordingly the apostle to the Hebrews xii. 25, 26, has taught us that it was the voice of Christ which shook Mount Sinai. " See that ye refuse not him that IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 299 speaketh from heaven; for if they escaped not who refused liim that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketli from heaven. Whose voice then shook the earth." It is not easy for one who is acquainted with the phraseology of the New Testament, to understand any other by " him that speaketh from heaven" than Jesus Christ. But this is the immediate antecedent to the relative, which begins the next clause, " Whose voice ;" and the time marked by " then" is suiTiciently determined by the context to be the time of giving the law from Mount Sinai. All these particulars laid together constitute an evidence which appears to be satisfactory, that Jesus Christ is the person who appear- ed to the patriarchs, and gave the law from Mount Sinai, who was worshipped in the temple at Jerusalem, and who was announced by the prophets as the author of a new dispensation. Section III. There are some objections to the conclusiveness of the evidence now adduced, and there is a difference of opinion with regard to the amount of the proposition, supposing it to be proved. It is proper that you should be acquainted both with the objections and Avith the dift'erent opinions. In following out this discussion, I was led to con- sult a variety of authors, many of whom repeat the same things, with a small change of expression. By comparing them together, I shall be able to state the objections and the different opinions clearly ; and it may be both agreeable and useful to you to know the names, and to receive a specimen of the manner of those writers who have entered most deeply into this controversy. In the quotations which follow, I shall have occasion to oppose Socinian, Arian, and Athanasian writers to one another. For the objections which the Socinians make to the evidence of the proposition, are answered not only by the Athanasians, but by the Arians also ; and the futility of the inference which the Arians draw from the proposition is exposed by the Socinians, as well as by the Athanasians. So that those who hold the third opinion concerning the Person of Christ, have for their allies, in one part of this discussion, those who hold the second opinion, and in another part of it, those who hold the first. The Socinians are obliged, in consistency with their principles, to combat the whole of that proposition which we have been endeavour- ing to establish, because, if it be true, it leaves no doubt with regard to the pre-existence of Jesus. I will not follow them in their attempts to give another interpretation to those texts which constitute the evidence of the proposition, but will leave you to judge from review- ing them, whether that interpretation by which the proposition is supported be not agreeable to the natural sense of the words in every particular passage, and to the analogy of all of them taken together In stating the objections to the evidence, I have two things to lay before you. — 1. The Socinian solution of that expression in the Old Testament, an Angel of Jehovah, which furnishes one of the general grounds of the proposition. 2. A plausible argument against it, 300 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS drawn from a mode of expression which occurs in different places of the New Testament. 1. The person whom we traced through the Old Testament is often called an angel, the angel of the Lord, from whence it has been inferred that he cannot be God the Father. But Mr. Lindsey, one of the latest and ablest defenders of pure Socinianism, in the Sequel to his Apology, furnishes the following solution of that expression : " In the account which is given of the divine appearances in the Scriptures, it is sometimes related in what form and manner they were notified and made, viz. by an extraordinary light, fire, cloud, audible voice, &c. At all other times it cannot be doubted but there was some sensible sign given, though it be not always mentioned. Now this outward token of the presence of God is what is meant generally by tha angel of God, where not particularly specified and appropriated otherwise ; that which manifested his appearance, whatever it was." He considers the Shechinah, or material symbol of glory, and the audible voice of the oracle from thence, as angels of the Lord, the true God acting upon them, and manifesting himself by them; and therefore he concludes that it was not any great angel or separate spirit who was seen and heard in the instances quoted from the Old Testament, but God himself appearing in the only way in which a spiritual being can appear, by sensible tokens and actions, exhibited for the end proposed, such as an extraordinary light, a particular shape or figure, an articulate voice, &c. &c.* The solution proceeds upon this sound principle of theism, that all the creatures of God may be employed to execute his purposes. He maketh the winds his messengers, and fire, pestilence, and sword, receiving their destination from him, may be called his angels. But this principle, however true, does not give a satisfactory explication of the subject to which it is applied. For the appearances to be accounted for are not occasional, unconnected, and varying. We have found one angel of God stand- ing forth through all the Scriptures, bearing a certain character, and employed in offices and actions which are described with every circumstance of time and place that can serve to mark a person, and often with a reference to former offices and actions of the same person. I shall give you this answer to the Socinian solution, in the words of Mr. Taylor, an English clergyman, who published, some years ago, a book entitled. The Apology of Ben Mordecai to his friends for embracing Christianity. Under the assumed appearance of a Jew, stating the reasons which made him think the Christian faith not inconsistent with the law of Moses, Mr. Taylor artfully introduces, and defends with learning and ingenuity, his own views of the pecu- liar doctrines of Christianity. He considers Jesus as the first of the creatures of God, an angel distinguished above every other, who conducted the dispensation of the Old Testament, and who completed the scheme for the redemption of the human race, by assuming a body at the time when the Gospel was preached. This part of his creed leads him to defend the pre-existence of Jesus against the attacks of the Socinians ; and in answer to their hypothesis, that Jl the appearances which we have ascribed to one person are nothing * Sequel to Lindsey's Apol. p. 324, 336. IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 301 more than the appearance of the invisible Jehovah by symbol, he thus reasons : " The accounts of many of these appearances are given in so plain and historical a manner, and with so many circumstances, which cannot be accounted for either by vision or figurative expres- sion, that both the Jews and Christians of former ages have looked upon them to be literal ; and if they are not historical facts, there is no dependence upon the literal sense of any one action recorded in Scripture. "" A plague or an earthquake may be called a messenger of Jehovah, though it be no person. But it is never called Jehovah : and it is impossible to conceive how an angel called Jehovah, who was visible to several people at the same time, and conversed with them personally, can be considered merely as a symbol, or as any other than a real person,"* 2. The second objection against the proposition which we have been illustrating, is a plausible argument drawn from a mode of expression that occurs in different places of the New Testament. It is said in the first verse of the Epistle to the Hebrews, " God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son." And there are many other expressions to the same purport, which seem to imply that God had not spoken by his Son till the last days ; and undoubtedly, if we knew nothing more of the divine dis- pensations than these words contain, this is the interpretation we should give them. But every author is to be explained in a manner which renders his meaning in one place consistent with his meaning in another ; and every author, supposing that his readers will ob- serve this rule, is not accustomed to say in one place every thing that may be said upon a subject, but leaves much to be supplied from other places. When we take into view what we may learn from the rest of Scripture concerning the character and offices of the Son, it is easy to interpret the words of the apostle in this manner. God spake formerly by the prophets, the messengers of his will to the fathers. The Son did not appear. It was not known to the world or to the prophets that they were inspired by the ministry of the Son ; and no inconvenience arose from this circumstance not being made known, because the message was equally divine, and claimed the same reverence, whether the prophets received it from God, or from the Son of God. But now the Son hath been made manifest. A person assuming that name, and conversing freely with men, hath declared God, not in vision to prophets, but openly to the people. Now, therefore, it is fit to reveal the original dignity of this Person, in order that respect for the messenger may procure attention and obedience to the message. The earliest Christian writers furnish the answer which I have now given. " The Lord was truly the instructor of the ancient people, first by Moses, afterwards by the prophets. But he is the guide of the new people, by himself face to face."t And the atiswer has been adopted by those who hold the second and third opinions concerning the Person of Christ, as sufficient to repel this part of the Socinian objection. " The plain sense of the word," says • Ben Mordecai, p. 228, 256. ■J- Clem. Alex. Pjedag. L. I. c. 8, 11. 28 302 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS Mr. Taylor, " appears to me to be this : God spake formerly to our fathers by the mediation or ministry of the prophets, bnt now speaks to ns by the Son liimself, without any such mediation."* But there is another part of this objection arising from those expressions in the New Testament where the law seems to be ascribed to angels. " Our fathers," says Stephen, Acts vii. 53, " received the law by the disposi- tion of angels." And the apostle to the Hebrews argues upon this ground, that the gospel is superior to the law. " If the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which began to be spoken by the Lord ?" It is impossible, then, say the Socinians to other Christians, that the Son, whom you account a being superior to angels, was the Author of the law, for the excellence of the gospel is made to consist in this, that it was given by him. Tlie answer to this objection is, in part, the same as to the former. It is implied in some passages of the Old Testament, that the giver of the law was attended upon Mount Sinai by a multitude of the heavenly host. — " The Lord," says Moses, Deut. xxxiii. 2, "came from Sinai: He shined forth from Mount Paran, and he came with ten thousand of his saints ; from his right hand went a fiery law for them." The Son of God was not then revealed. His superiority to the retinue of angels was not known ; and no particular mention being made of him, it is said accurately by Stephen that the fathers received the law «? Siaraya? ayytxcov, inter turmas angelorum. Whereas the gospel was spoken by the Lord himself, without that attendance of the heavenly host which consti- tuted part of the awful scene upon Mount Sinai, but with a mani- festation of his own original glory. In this respect the manner of giving the law is clearly distinguished from the manner of giving the gospel, without our being obliged to infer from the expressions used that an angel was the author of the law. But in order to perceive the full force of the answer to this objection, you must recollect that the ten commandments are not included under " the word spoken by angels ;" for the history of Moses requires us to make a distinction between the decalogue and the rest of the law. The ten command- ments were spoken by God himself " God spake these words, say- ing, I am Jehovah." But the majesty with which they were delivered was so terrible, that the people entreated God would not speak to them any more. " Speak thou with us," they said to Moses, " and we will hear, but let not God speak with us, lest we die." Accord- ingly Moses says, Deut. v. 22, " These words," the decalogue, " the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of fire, with a great voice, and he added no more." " The rest," says Dr. Randolph, "both the judicial and the ceremonial law, was delivered, and tlie covenant was made, by the mediation of Moses; and therefore the apostle says, Gal. iii, 19, 'The law was ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator :' hence it is called the law of Moses. And the character given of it in the Pentateuch is this — tliese are the statutes, and judgments, and laws, which the Lord made between him and the children of Israel in Mount Sinai, by the hand * Ben Mordecai, p. 317. IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 303 of Moses. In like manner, after the tabernacle was reared, God communed with Moses from between the chcrubims on the mercy seat, who represented angels, and with the priests who entered the tabernacle. But the people were not permitted to approach."* So far Dr. Randolph, formerly Professor of Divinity in Oxford, whose writings, one entitled a Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, and another, Prcelectiones Theological, chiefly upon the divinity of our Saviour, I have found very useful, composed with sound judg- ment, and with much knowledge of the Scriptures. You will attend to the force of the distinction which he has mentioned. The ten commandments, which are of perpetual and universal obligation, and which are incorporated as part of the gospel, so that the moral law is established by faith, were spoken by God himself. But the judicial and ceremonial law, which were local temporary institutions, not ex- tending beyond the boundaries and the duration of the Jewish state, were ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator. The divine Author of them was withdrawn from the eyes of the people, for Moses stood between him and them : but there was no intervention of this kind in the delivery of the gospel. Instead of that terrible majesty which had accompanied the giving of the ten commandments, which made the people request that God would not speak any more, there was in the appearance of Jesus a grace which invited men to draw near ; and he himself spoke the words of eternal life. Considering, then, the Socinian objections as not sufficient to inva- lidate the evidence that has been adduced, I shall now direct your attention to the different opinions that have been held concerning the amount of the general proposition. If Jesus appeared to the patriarchs, gave the law, and was worshipped in the temple, it is plain that he existed before he was born of Mary. But it is not self- evident whether he be an exalted creature, or essentially God. And many of those who consider him as the first of the creatures of God, while they defend his pre-existence against the Socinians, endeavour to reconcile this proposition with their own system. You will judge of the nature of the attempt, from two books in which it is formally made. The one is entitled, Essay on Spirit, by Dr. Clayton, formerly Bishop of Clogher, in Ireland. The principles of his book are these. The whole expanse is full of spirits of different ranks and degrees. God may communicate what proportions of his attributes he pleases to the different gradations of created beings : and, according to an ancient opinion, he may employ those upon whom he has conferred more exalted powers, to act in a middle station between him and the lower productions of his Almighty hand. Now, while inferior angels were appointed to preside over other people and nations upon earth, one angel, who is called by Moses Jehovah, had Israel assigned to him by the Most High as the portion of his inheritance. He Avas the guardian angel of the posterity of Abraham ; and the peculiar dis- tinction conferred upon him was this, that he was authorized to ap- pear in the name and person of Jehovah, as his image and represen- tative. Hence, although in some places he is distinguished from the • Prtel. Theolog. vol. iii. p. 397. 304 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS Almighty who sent him, yet, in others, he takes the name of Jehovali, and claims and receives the honours due to God. The other book is the apology of Ben Mordecai, one great object of which is to elucidate and support the opinion that had been delivered in the Essay on Spirit. Mr. Taylor lays down this principle, that as it is said in the Jewish Scriptures that Jehovah often appeared and conversed with men ; and as the supreme God and Father never was seen by any one, there must be some other person besides him who is called by that name. He illustrates the truth of this principle by most of the passages in the Old Testament, to which I have re- ferred in Section First ; and then he concludes from them : — " Thus we see that the sacred writers attribute to the angel who acts in the name, and authority, and moral character of God, the name Jehovah. And this angel, speaking in the name of God that sent him, uses the first person ; and whatever is performed by this angel is said to be performed by God himself. So the angel who appeared to Moses in the bush, said, * I am that I am. Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, I am hath sent me unto you.' All this is agreeable to the received customs of mankind, and well understood. The angel takes the name of Jehovah, because it is a common maxim, loquitur legatus sermone tnittentis eum, as an ambassador in the name of his king, or the fecialis when he denounced war in the name of the Roman people : and what is done by the angel, is said to be done by God, according to another maxim. Qui facit per cdium, facit per se* From these two writers you may learn the Arian opinion with re- gard to the amoimt of the proposition which we have been consider- ing. That person, they say, whom the Scriptures of the Old Testa- ment call both angel and Jehovah, is a created spirit, who was allowed to personate the Almighty, not only speaking by his authority, but appearing in his person, and bearing his name, who having, in the name of Jehovah, conversed with the patriarchs, and given the law, came in the last days in his own person to preach the gospel. To this opinion I shall oppose the words of Mr. Lindsey and of Dr. Randolph. It is an opinion which the Socinians cannot admit, because it establishes the pre-existence of Jesus : and as this opinion appears to remove some of the difficulties which attend the third opinion con- cerning the person of Christ, and has been adopted by many as a middle system between that which degrades the Saviour of the world to the rank of a man, and that which exalts him to be equal with God the Father, the Socinians consider it as peculiarly formidable to their tenets, and they attack it with much vigour, and often with sound argument. Mr. Lindsey, after quoting the manner in which the Lord passed by and proclaimed his name before Moses, says, " If this be not a description and peculiar character of God, where shall we meet with it ? An angel ever so great, ever so ancient, is still a creature ; and can never be clothed, nor ought to be clothed with these divine attributes upon any occasion." " The whole transaction at Mount Sinai shows that Jehovah was present, and acted, and not another * Ben Mordecai, p. 245, 233. IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 305 for him. It is the God that had delivered them out of Egypt, with whom they were to enter into covenant, as their God, and who there- upon accepted them as his people, and who was the author of their religion and laws, and who himself delivered to them those ten com- mands, the most sacred part. There is nothing to lead us to imagine that the person who was their God, did not speak in his own name ; not the least intimation that here was another representing him."* The author of the Essay on Spirit is aware of the force of these objections to his system. " The only difficulty in this case," he says, " is that the Jehovah of Zion does not always declare that he is deputed, but actually and literally speaks in his own name, calls him- self Jehovah, and positively prohibits the worship of any God but himself Thou shalt have none other Gods before me ; thereby seeming to forbid even the worship of the Supreme Jehovah." His answer to this difficulty is, that the Hebrews were far from being explicit and accurate in their style ; and that it was customary for prophets and angels to speak in the name and character of God.f You will judge how far this answer removes the difficulty, from the following extract out of the writings of Dr. Randolph, who, in his vindication of the doctrines of the Trinity, has given a formal answer to the Essay on Spirit ; and in other parts of his works also, employs much pains to establish this point, that the angel who is called Jehovah in the Old Testament is not a creature, but truly God. " Some, to evade these strong proofs of our Lord's divinity, have asserted that this was only a created angel, appearing in the name or person of the Father ; it being customary in Scripture for one person to sustain the character, and act and speak in the name of another. But these assertions want proof I find no instances of one person acting and speaking in the name of another, without first declaring in whose name he acts and speaks. The instances usually alleged are nothing to the purpose. If we sometimes find an angel in the book of revelation speaking in the name of God, yet from the context it will be easy to show that this angel was the great angel, the angel of the covenant. But if there should be some instances in the prophetical or poetical parts of Scripture, of an abrupt change of persons, where the person speaking is not particularly specified, this will by no means come up to the case before us. Here is a person sustaining the name and character of the most High God from one end of the Bible to the other ; bearing his glorious and fearful name, the incommunicable name Jehovah, expressive of his necessary existence ; sitting in the throne of God ; dwelling and presiding in his temple ; delivering laws in his own name ; giving out oracles ; hearing prayers ; forgiving sins. And yet these writers would persuade us that this was only a tutelary angel ; that a creature was the God of Israel, and that to this creature all their service and wor- ship was directed ; that the great God, ' whose name is jealous,' was pleased to give his glory, his worship, his throne, to a creature. What is this but to make the law of God himself introductory of the same idolatry that was practised by all the nations of the heathen? But * Lindsey, p. .313—339. + Essay on Spirit, p. 65. 28* 2 T 306 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS we are told, that bold figures of speech are common in the Hebrew- language, which is not to be tied down in its interpretation to the severer rules of modern criticism. We may be assured that those opinions are indefensible, which cannot be supported without charging the word of God with want of propriety or perspicuity. Such pre- tences might be borne with, if the question were about a phrase or two in the poetical or prophetical parts of Scripture. But this, if it be a figure, is a figure which runs through the whole Scripture. And a bold interpreter must he be, who supposes that such figures are perpetually and uniformly made use of in a point of such importance, without any meaning at all. This is to confound the use of language, to make the Holy Scripture a mysterious unintelligible book, sufficient to prove nothing, or rather to prove any thing, which a wild imagi- nation shall suggest."* I have not been willing to interrupt the impression which this whole passage is fitted to make. The three great circumstances con- tained in it, and which constitute the whole argument upon this subject, are these. 1. The uniformity with which the angel appears in the person of Jehovah. It is not upon a few particular occasions, when an abrupt change of persons might be dictated by strong emotions, or interpreted by interesting situations. But throughout the whole Bible, at the delivery of laws, in plain historical narration, as well as in impassioned poetry, the angel, without any intimation of a figure, speaks as God. But, as has been well said, even an ambas- sador, when he declares the commands of his prince, speaks in the third person, — The King my master. The prophets commonly introduced their revelations with this exordium. Thus saith the Lord, before they presumed to speak in his name. Angels, when they appeared in vision, declared that they were sent by the God of heaven ; and there appears the grossest impiety in supposing that a creature during a succession of ages, histrioniarn exercidsse, in qua Dei nomen assumat, et omnia, quse Dei sunt, sibi attribuat.\ 2. The second circumstance is, that this angel not only takes the other names by which the Almighty is known, but calls himself Jehovah, although that word, both by its natural import, and by the manner in which the Scriptures introduce it, appears to be the proper distinguish- ing name of the Supreme God. Eyu «^i 6 wv, is the exposition which the Septuagint give of this name. Now ■to ov was the name given by Plato to the Supreme Being. 'Et, Thou art, was the single word written upon the entrance of the temple at Delphos; and Plutarch says that this name is solely applicable to God, since that which truly is must be sempiternal. The Scripture use of the name Jehovah corresponds to the import of this exposition. " Thou whose name alone is Jehovah." " Jehovah is my name, and my glory will I not give to another."^ Yet this word the angel takes to himself; and when Moses asked him, if " they shall say unto me, what is his name ? What shall I say unto them ?" this is the name which he desires Moses to carry to the children of Israel as his.§ 3. The third circumstance is, that the angel not only demands worship, but claims * Randolph's View, vol. ii. p. 129. f Bull. p. 10. + Ps.lxxxiii. 18. § Exod. iii. 13, 15, IN HIS PRE-EXISTENT STATE. 307 it as his to the exclusion of every other being. The professed object of the law of Moses was to preserve the Jews from the idolatry of the surrounding nations. But if the author of their law was only a creature of a higher rank than the angels who presided over otlier kingdoms, and if the continued use of a figure of speech, which was never properly explained, led them to consider this creature as God, then did the Almighty lend his name to establish in the land of Israel the worship of a creature ; and all the preparation and splen- dour of the law were insignificant, since it only taught the Jews to worship one creature, while their neighbours were worshipping another. These reasons appear to show, that without supposing an inextri- cable delusion to run through all the Scriptures, we must admit that the person whom we have traced in the Old and New Testament is not a creature, but that the name which he uniformly takes to him- self, belongs to him by nature. It may perhaps occur to you, that by ascribing that intercourse with mankind which is recorded in the Old Testament to a person who is himself truly God, we remove God the Father from all care of the children of men, and detract from the honour due to him. But we may find, as we advance in this subject, that the Scriptures have obviated this difficulty, by intimating that perfect union between the Father and the Son, which was just mentioned in summing up the argument from creation. Although God made the world by his Son, yet he is also the Creator of all, because the Father and the Son are one ; and although God from the beginning manifested himself by his Son, " who is the image of the invisible God," yet the glory of the Father and the Son are the same. It was the power of the undivided Godhead which was exerted by the Son at creation; it was the majesty of the undivided Godhead which appeared in the Son upon Mount Sinai ; and all the adorations offered through ages to the giver of the law were the tribute which the one true God is alone worthy to receive. We may find that this system is revealed in Scripture ; and that it reconciles all the discoveries made concern- ing the person of the Son of God. At present we are employed in collecting the facts upon which this system rests ; and without pre- tending to speculate as to the probability of any particular fact, we receive the information which the Scripture affords. One great advantage we derive from the proposition which has lately engaged our attention. It connects in the closest manner the Old and the New Testament. They not only point to one great object, but they were conducted by one person, who, as Justin Mar- tyr speaks, although he did at length for good reasons take to himself a body, yet had always been doing good to the human race : for no excellent thing was ever performed by men without the presence of this Divine Person. You may expect then to find in the Old and New Testament, that unity of design, that correspondence and analogy of parts which mark all the schemes of a superior enlightened mind. According to this proposition, the glorious person who had established the dispensation of the Old Testament, is not made to withdraw as soon as it comes to an end. But he appears in the New Testament under another character, with a display of more conde- 308 ACTIONS ASCRIBED TO JESUS, ETC. scending and more universal love, to complete the work which he had begun, and to fulfil the words of his prophets. Every thing said by them concerning the person who had sent them is applied by this proposition to the person whom they announced ; and there is a depth and perfection of wisdom in the manner of the application. As it was not necessary that the Son of God should be known while the Old Testament dispensation existed, we find that the ancient Jews had very imperfect conceptions of his nature. But when he came in the flesh, he took off the veil from the ancient Scriptures. The Old Testament now appears to be full of Jesus Christ ; and all the reve- lations, from the beginning of the world, collected and interpreted by their application to him, redound to the honour, and illustrate the original dignity of the angel of the covenant. DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRIST'S PERSON, ETC. 309 CHAPTER VI. DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST TAUGHT DURING HIS LIFE. T HAVE considered both those passages of Scripture, which teach plainly that Jesus existed before he was born of Mary, and those which ascribe certain actions to him in his pre-existent state. The manner in which these actions are described, not only contains a clear refutation of the first opinion concerning the person of Christ, but seems intended to convey an impression that he is not a creature ; and with the prejudice arising from this impression, we now proceed to attend to those passages of Scripture which are to direct us in forming a conception of his original dignity. Dr. Clarke, in his Introduction to the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, expresses himself thus : " 'Tis a thing very destructive of religion, and the cause of almost all divisions amongst Christians, when young persons, at their first entering upon the study of divinity, look upon human and perhaps modern forms of speaking, as the rule of their faith ; understanding those also according to the accidental sound of the words, or according to the notions which happen at any particular time to prevail in the world, and then picking out, as proofs, some few single texts of Scripture, which, to minds already strongly prejudiced, must needs seem to sound, or may easily be ac- commodated, the same way ; while they attend not impartially to the whole scope and general tenor of Scripture. Whereas on the con- trary were the whole Scriptures first thoroughly studied, and seriously considered, as the rule and only rule of truth in matters of religion; and the sense of all human forms and expressions deduced from thence, the greatest part of errors, at least of uncharitable divisions, might in all probability have been prevented." Dr. Clarke speaks the language of all true Protestants, when he says that the Scriptures, thoroughly studied and seriously considered, are the rule, and the only rule of truth in matters of religion. He speaks like a sound critic, when he says that texts ought not to be understood according to the accidental sound of the words, or accord- ing to the notions which happen at any particular time to prevail. But it does not appear to me how we can attain a certain knowledge of the whole scope and general tenor of Scripture, without a close examination of particular texts. In every inquiry we find it neces- sary to guard against the errors which arise from partial views, by comparing different parts of the subject, and by correcting the conclu- sions which had been too hastily formed. But still, notwithstanding 310 DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRIST's PERSON this danger, the scientific method of arriving at truth in all subjects is to proceed by an induction of particulars to an apprehension of the whole ; and in the study of theology, which is in truth the study of the Scriptures, any notions formed of the doctrine contained in them must be loose and precarious, unless you investigate by sound criticism the amount of words and phrases. Although therefore I consider the collection of texts from the New Testament relative to the doctrhie of the Trinity, which Dr. Clarke has made the ground- work of his propositions, as a most useful help to any one who sets himself to examine the subject, I do think that by following the method of studying it which he recommends, there is a danger of being prevented, by a phraseology which runs through many of the texts, from receiving the obvious sense of others. If, because it is said in numberless places that the Son is sent by the Father, and came to do the will of the Father, and that all things are given him by God, we infer that there is an inferiority to God in his nature, and after- wards find this inference in direct opposition to those texts, which teach that there is an equality, we have reason to presume that we have committed a mistake ; and we are reminded, that the proper method of proceeding was not to draw a conclusion from a general impression, but to begin with ascertaining the sense of particular texts, and to rest in that conclusion which affords a consistent inter- pretation of all the passages that relate to the same subject. I said, indeed, that we bring with us to the part of the subject upon which we are now entering, an impression that Jesus is not a creature. But this is an impression suggested by a careful and patient examina- tion of those texts in which he is described as the Creator of the world, and by the whole tenor of those parts of the Old and New Testament, in which he is described as the Person by whom all inter- course between the Deity and the human race has been conducted. It is impossible to make progress in any subject without forming some opinion as we advance. If that opinion receive no support in the further prosecution of the subject, it rests upon its original foundation. If it be contradicted, we ought to revise the grounds of it, that we may discover where the mistake lies : but if it be found to coincide with the amount of future researches, it receives light and confirma- tion from this concurrence of evidence. These are the principles upon which I am to proceed in a critical examination of those texts of the New Testament, the true meaning of which must decide the question between the second and third opinions concerning the person of Christ. But as the texts are found chiefly in the Epistles, which were not written for twenty years after our Lord's death, I think it proper to begin with an historical view of the manner in which the doctrine concerning his person was taught during his life, It is manifest to any one who reads the gospels, that our Lord did not untold all the truths of his religion at once to his disciples. In condescension to the narrowness of their views, and the strength of their prejudices, there was a preparation by which he led them on, as they were able to bear it, to points of difficult apprehension. When we observe that he never spoke plainly of his sufferings, till they had declared their faith in him as the Messiah — that the future extension TAUGHT DURING HIS LIFE, 311 of his religion was intimated to them in parables — that they were not permitted before his death to preach the gospel to any but Jews — and that their expectations of a temporal kingdom continued till his ascen- sion, we cannot doubt that some of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity were very imperfectly known by the apostles while our Lord was with them ; and we are not surprised to find these words in his last discourse to them, " I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now."* If he was truly God, there was a pecu- liar fitness in the reserve with which he chose to reveal the dignity of his person. He appeared as a man, that he might converse familiarly with his brethren — that, by leading a life of sorrow, he might go before his companions in the practice of those virtues which they also were to be required to exercise — and that, by falling in due time a victim to the malice of his enemies, he might accomplish the salvation of the world. For these purposes, the veil of humanity was assumed ; and if it was indeed the Godhead which that veil con- cealed from the eyes of ordinary beholders, the same purposes re- quired that those persons who were continually around tlie person of Jesus, should have, during his life, only an indistinct impression of the glory and majesty of him with whom they conversed — and that the clear knowledge that he was God, should be conveyed to their minds after his death, by that recollection and explication of his words, which they were to derive from the illumination of his Spirit. After he had ascended to heaven, they could not think too highly of his character ; and their conceptions of the wisdom and grace of their Master would be very much raised, when they found that those words, the full force of which they understood not at the time when they were spoken, admitted of an interpretation every way suited to the exalted notions which they were taught by the Spirit to enter- tain concerning the dignity of him from whom they had proceeded. This appears to be the plan which the wisdom of God followed in revealing this subject. We find, during the life of Jesus, intimations of the superiority of his character, such as are not only perfectly con- sistent with the future revelation that he is God, but such as nothing less than that revelation can fully explain. At the same time, we find both the apostles and Jews rather confounded than enlightened by these intimations; and it is not in the conversations recorded in the Gospels, but in the expressions used by the authors of them, or by the other apostles after the day of Pentecost, tliat we discern their knowledge of the character of their Master. By giving a short con- nected view of these previous intimations, I shall follow the prepara- tion which our Lord used in showing himself to his disciples. All the circumstances which attended the birth of Jesus, n)arked him out as an extraordinary person. The annunciation by the angel of the Lord, first to Mary, and afterwards to Joseph — the reference to ancient prophecy, in the language which the angel used — the glory which shone around the shepherds of Bethlehem at the time of the birth — and the song of the multitude of the heavenly host which was with the angel that spake — together Mnth the visit of the wise men, who, led by a star in the East, " came to Jerusalem to worship him • John xvj. 12. 312 DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRISt's PERSON that was born King of the Jews," — all these things could not fail to be noised abroad ; they were matter of wonder to those that heard them, and Mary, not understanding what they meant, "kept all these things," we are told, " and pondered them in her heart." The first direct explication of them was at the baptism of Jesus. John, whose mother Elizabeth was a relation of Mary, had been born a few months before Jesus. The Angel, who appeared to his father Zacharias the priest, had said that the son who was to be born "should go before the Lord God of Israel in the spirit and power of Elias :" and Zacharias, instructed by the temporary dumbness, which had been the punishment of his unbelief, to repose entire confidence in the words of the angel, said, after John was born, " Thou, child, shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest ; for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways."* When John was about thirty, " the word of God came unto him," and he appeared, accord- ing to the destination of ancient prophecy applied to him at his birth, " the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord."t Although personally acquainted with Jesus, John knew not that he was the Messiah, till taught by these words, in what manner he was to be distinguished from others : " Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."t Soon after this revelation was made to John, Jesus came with the multitude to be baptized of John, who preached the baptism of repentance ; and as he went up out of the water, the heavens were opened, and the Spirit of God descended, either in the shape of a dove, or in the manner in which a dove descends, and lighted upon him. " And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Instantly John recognized Jesus as the person to whom he was sent to bear witness. Having seen, he " bare record, that this is the Son of God," and pointed out Jesus as such to the Jews.§ It appears impossible to me, that any person, who, to all the circumstances that had conspired to raise the highest expectations concerning Jesus, joins the solemnity and splendor of that appearance by which he is made known to John, his forerunner, can interpret the words uttered by the voice from heaven in an inferior metaphorical sense, or can give them any other than that exalted import which they naturally bear, and which is suggested by the use of them in ancient prophecy. This opinion founded upon the circumstances of the case is confirmed by two critical remarks which deserve attention. The one is, that in all the three Evangelists who record them, the article is prefixed both to the substantive and the adjective. Matt. iii. 17, oitoi ootw s vto; (xov 6 ayartt]toi ; the most discriminating mode of expres- sion that could be employed, as if to separate Jesus from every other who at any time had received the appellation of the Son of God, and to lead back the thoughts of the hearers to the prophecies in which the Messiah had been announced under that name. This is that Son of mine who is the beloved. The other critical remark is, that, in all the three Evangelists, the verb of the second clause, in whom I cm * Luke ch. i. j- Luke iii. 3 — 6. 4 John i. 33. § Mat. iii. 16, 17. John i. 34. TAUGHT DURING HIS LIFE. 313 well pleased, is in the first aorist, c^ 9 sv8oxr;M. Now, although we often render the Greek aorist by the English present, yet this can be done with propriety only when the proposition is equally true whether it be stated in the present, in the past, or in the future time. T«5 f^ev tiov tavxw awr^OeMi oxtyoj x^o^oi Siixvssv. It matters nothing to the truth or significancy of this proposition, in what time you translate Sic^-var, for a short space of time has dissolved the connexions of the wicked in past ages, does dissolve them in our days, and will dissolve them in the days of our posterity. This force of the Greek indefinite tense is preserved in English by introducing the adverb always. A short space of time always dissolves the connexions of the wicked.* And tlius the analogy of the Greek language requires us not only to con- sider the name. Son of God, as applied in a peculiar sense to Jesus, but also to refer to the expression used at his baptism, to that inter- course which had subsisted between the Father and the Son, before this name was announced to men. This voice from heaven which John heard appeared to have con- veyed to his mind the most exalted apprehensions of that Person whom it marked out to him. For the words in which he afterwards speaks of Jesus correspond to the third opinion concerning his Person, rather than to the second. " He that cometh from above is above all. And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand."t We can- not say that the full meaning of the expression was known to the apostles, and that they could not consider a man, to whom such a name had been given in such a manner, as merely a man whom God had sent. And yet, when we find them introducing at different times into declarations of their faith, this expression. Thou art the Son of the living God, it is natural to suppose that they referred to the voice heard at his baptism. There is one place in John's Gospel, where our Lord appears to found an argument for his divine mission upon this voice. John v. 37, 38. He had spoken of the Witness which he received from John, and of the works that he did, which bare witness that the Father had sent him : and he adds, according to our translation, " And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you ; for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. "A different translation of these verses, which had been suggested by others, and which always appeared to me probable, is adopted and ably defended by Dr. Campbell. His translation is, " Nay, the Father who sent me, hath himself attested me. Did ye never hear his voice, or see his form ? Or have ye forgotten his declarations, that ye believe not him whom he hath commissioned ?" The reader will observe, says Dr. Camp- bell, in a note, that the two clauses which are rendered in the English Bible as declarations, are in this version translated as questions. The difference in the original is only in the pointing. That they ought to be so read, we need not, in my opinion, stronger evidence, than that they throw much light upon the whole passage, which, read in the » Dalzel's Coll. Gracca Majora, Nota: in Herod. 19, 6. Ed. 1808. t Johniii. 31, 32,35. 29 2U 314 DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRISt's PERSON common way, is both dark and ill-connected. Our Lord here refers them to the testimony given of him at his baptism ; and, when you read the two clauses as questions, all the chief circumstances attend- ing that memorable testimony are exactly pointed out. Have ye never heard his voice, i|>wf»? ix rwi/ ov^avcov, nor seen his form — the aufiatixov evSoi, in which Luke says the Holy Ghost descended? And have ye not his declaration abiding in you, tov -Koyov, the words which were spoken at that time ? There appears to me very strong internal evidence for the correction proposed by Dr. Campbell, according to which our Lord here refers to the ^oyoj, the words uttered at his baptism, as his warrant for calling himself the Son of God. There is no doubt that he takes that name to himself in an eminent sense, both in his discourses with his disciples, with Nicodemus, a master in Israel, with the people of the Jews, and at his trial, when, being asked by the High Priest, " Art thou the Son of God ?" he acknowledged that he was : a confession which, according to the sense affixed to the question by those who put it, was direct blasphemy. " What need we any further witnesses," said the High Priest : " ye have heard the blasphemy." It is very remark- able, that although our Lord seems to delight in calling the Almighty, when he is speaking of him to the disciples, your Father, your heavenly Father, a gracious name most suitable to the discoveries of liis religion ; and although, in the prayer which he taught them to use, the address is, " Our Father which art in heaven," yet he never uses the expression our Father in such a manner as to include him- self with them. All his discourse implies that God is his Father, in a sense different from that in which he is the Father of all mankind ; and the form of his expression in one place seems chosen to mark the distinction, John xx. 17, " Go tell my brethren, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God, and your God." Indeed the strongest proofs of the divinity of Jesus, that "are found in his own words, arise from the manner in which he speaks of the connexion between his Father and him. « All things are delivered unto me of my Father; and no man knoweth the Son but the Father: neither knoweth any man the Father but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."* Here the Father and the Son are held forth as alike incomprehensible to mortals. "What things soever the Father doth, these doth the Son likewise."! Here is an exact like- ness in their works. Eyo xm o rtatrje^ Iv Bafx.iv. " I and the Father are one."f The argument arising from the two last passages becomes much stronger than it appears at the first hearing them, when you attend to the circumstances in which the declarations were made. In the fifth chapter of John, our Lord, being accused of breaking the Sabbath, because upon that day he made a man whole, makes this apology, V. 17 : 'o jtatT]^ /xov Iw? a^tt, e^ya^stai, xayio f^ya^o^uat. " My Father worketh hitherto, and I work," ?. e. My Father, who rested on the seventh day from the work of creation, never rests from the work of preserving and blessing his creatures ; and I, after his example, do works of mercy on the Sabbath day. The Jews were offended w-th this saying, because they conceived it to imply that Jesus called God * Mat. xi. 27. f John v. 19. + John x. 30. TAUGHT DURING HIS LIFE. 315 Ha^f^a iSiov, which means much more than our translation has express- ed, " said that God was his Father." U^ou natt^a, means his Father, in a sense appropriated to him. I5w5 is opposed to xolvq^. And I call him iSioj rtat>7^, who is not the Father of others as well as of me, but who is the Father of me only. From his calling God peculiarly his Father, they inferred that he made himself equal with God ; and therefore they sought to kill him. Attempts have been made to give a different interpretation to the 18th verse. But they appear to me so forced that I will not recite them. What the verse conveys to every plain reader is this, that the Jews, although they looked up to God as the father of their nation, considered it as blasphemy in any individual to call God in a peculiar manner his Father, because this was putting in a claim to that title, the Son of God, which seems to imply a sameness or equality of nature with the Supreme Being, and which they were taught by their Scriptures to regard with the high- est reverence. But our Lord, instead of giving such an explication of his words as might exculpate him from this charge of blasphemy, subjoins in his answer, other expressions which appear to be a direct assertion of that equality with God, which the Jews conceived to be implied in his calling God peculiarly his Father. He says, " What things soever the Father doth, these also doth the Son likewise," assuming the omnipotence of God. He says, " The Father showeth the Son all things that himself doth," making his knowledge com- mensurate with the works of God. He says, " The Son quickeneth whom he will. As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." It is acknowledged in all these expressions, that whatsoever the Son has is communicated to him by the Father; and this is implied in the very name the Son of God. But if this communication be not of so peculiar a kind as to imply an equality with God, a sameness of nature and perfections, there is not only an unwarrantable presumption in the words of our Lord, but in the circumstances in which they were uttered, there is an equivoca- tion inconsistent with the sincerity of an honest man. This argument is confirmed by attending to a similar passage in the 10th chapter of John. Our Lord, speaking of that assurance of eternal life which his religion conveys to his disciples, says, x. 29, 30, " They shall never perish. My Father which gave them me is greater than all ; and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 1 and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones to stone him." And they assign as the reason for so doing, the very same which John had mentioned in the fifth chapter: "We stone thee for blasphemy, because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God." Our Lord's answer is, " Is it not written in your law, I said, ye are gods ? If he called them gods unto whom the word of God came, and the Scriptures cannot be broken, i. e. if the language of Scripture be unexceptionable, say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God?" These words are quoted in support of their opinion, by those who hold that our Saviour is called the Son of God, purely upon account of the commission which he received. But the force of the argument, and the consistency of the discourses, require us to affix a much higher meaning to that expression. Our Lord is reason- 316 DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRISt's PERSON ing a fortiori. He vindicates himself from the charge of blasphemy, in calling himself the Son of God, because even those who hold civil offices upon earth, are called in Scripture gods. But that he might not appear to put himself upon a level with them, and to retract his former assertion, " I and the Father are one," he not only calls him- self, " him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world," which implies that he had a being, and that God was his Father before he was sent ; but he subjoins, " If I do not the works of my Father be- lieve me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him ;" expressions which appear to be equivalent to his former assertion, " I and the Father are one," and which were certainly understood by the Jews in that sense ; for, as soon as he had uttered them, " they sought again to take him." The full argument of our Lord is, that the union between the Father and him gives him a much better title to the name of the Son of God than any office can give men to the name gods : and thus at the very time that he shelters himself from the charge of blasphemy under this Scripture expression, he intimates repeatedly, in the hearing of those who accused him of blasphemy for what he said, the superior dignity of his person. As our Lord, in this emphatical manner, took to himself the name of the Son of God, so there is a remarkable passage in which he guards those with whom he conversed, against supposing that his being called the Son of David, implied a sameness of nature, or an equality in point of dignity with his earthly progenitor. " While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them. What think ye of Christ ? Whose son is he ? They say unto him, the son of David. He saith unto them. How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. If David then call him Lord, how is he his son ? And no man was able to answer him a word."* It is known to those who have read psalm ex. in the original, that although the Septuagint version be ftrtfv 6 Kr^wj ^9 Kv^t9 ;uov, and our English translation be " The Lord said unto my Lord ;" yet the word in the nominative is different from that which is in the dative. The nominative is Jehovah, the incommunicable name of God expressing his necessary existence. The dative is Adonai, a word expressing dominion or sovereignty. It admits, therefore, of being construed with a possessive pronoun, my Lord ; and it may denote different kinds and degrees of dominion. The difficulty, then, is not what our translations might suggest, that the same name Lord is applied to the Messiah as to the Supreme Being. But it lies here. David, a Sovereign Prince, who had no earthly superior, who was taught by the promise of God to consider the Messiah as his descendant, yet many ages before the Messiah was born, calls him " My Lord ;" an expression which is a direct acknowledgment of his inferiority to his own descendant, and which implies that the Messiah existed in a superior nature before he descended from him. Our Lord draws the attention of the Pharisees to this difficulty in their own Scriptures, which they seem to have overlooked, and which they were unable * Matth. xxii. 41—46. TAUGHT DURING PIS LIFE. 317 to solve. He could not solve it, without unfolding to them what he chose at present only obscurely to intimate. But he leaves it with them as a proof drawn from an authority which they did not ques- tion, that if they considered the Messiah as of no higher extraction than a son of David, they were mistaken. The whole conduct of our Lord tended to confirm the impression arising from this manner in which he spake of himself. Amidst all the simplicity, the humility, and condescension of his life, there was an unaffected dignity uniformly supported in his words and actions, which mark him, to an unprejudiced observer, as more than man. He discovered, upon many occasions, that knowledge of the secret workings of the heart, and that acquaintance with transactions the most retired from the eyes of men, which constitute a large part of the divine omniscience. And you cannot suppose, that repeated dis- plays of this omniscience would be overlooked by those who were continually with him, when you observe the effect which one instance produced ; John i. 47, " Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. Na- thanael saith, whence knowest thou me ? Jesus answered, before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee ;" referring probably to some act of secret devotion, or of private beneficence. Nathanael, finding that this stranger knew a transaction which no eye had seen, and no ear had heard from him, immediately exclaims, " Rabbi, thou art the Son of God ; thou art the King of Israel." In our Lord's miracles there was an ease and readiness which showed that he exerted inherent powers, and a command over nature which indicates its Lord. Upon some occasions he chose, for the instruction of the spectators, to direct their attention to his Father, from whom he acknowledged that he received all power; but at other times, he healed diseases, or raised the dead by a word. " I will, be thou clean." "Young man," speaking to him that was dead, " I say unto thee, arise." He taught men to infer from all his works, the union between his Father and him : and he interprets one of his miracles as a direct proof of his having power to do what be- longs to God alone. Mark ii. Knowing, probably, that the sick of the palsy who was brought to him was humbled by disease, and prepared to receive with contrition the Lord's Christ, he said to him, " Son, thy sins be forgiven thee." The scribes, who were sitting by, reasoned in their hearts, " Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies ? Who can forgive sins but God only ?" He discerned their reasonings, and lie answered them by saying, " Whether is it easier to say, thy sins be forgiven thee, or to say, arise, and take up thy bed and walk ?" The same divine power which would have rendered the one of these sayings, when pronounced by me, effectual, entitles me to use the other : " And therefore, that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, I say unto thee, arise." Here, then, Jesus takes to himself a right to forgive sins ; that prerogative which the scribes, both by reason, and by express declarations of their own scriptures, were taught to consider as belonging exclusively to God. Such are the proofs of the superior nature of Jesus, which were laid before the world during his abode upon earth. The ablest critics on the New Testament have not agreed as to the inference which 29* 318 DOCTRINE CONCERNING CHRIST's PERSON, ETC. the apostles drew from these proofs, whether a belief of the divinity of Jesus accompanied their belief of his being the Messiah. The question appears to me problematical, and I do not think that the New Testament contains sufiicient evidence to decide the point. But it is not of great importance, I observed, that the intimations of the divinity of our Lord, given during his life, were purposely obscure; and the apostles brought with them such prejudices, and met with such disappointment in their expectations, that it is no wonder if they did not reason from these intimations as they might have done. But there is recorded in the conclusion of the Gospel of John a declaration made by one of the apostles, after the resurrection of Jesus, of his having then attained the knowledge of that doctrine, which all these intimations seem intended to prepare them for receiving. Thomas, after his scruples were removed, answered and said to Jesus, John XX. 28, o Kv^toj fiov, xat, 6 0foj fiov ; a Conjunction of words probably from Ps. XXXV. 23, "Awake to my judgment, my God, and my Lord." The Socinians consider the words of Thomas as an exclamation of surprise upon seeing Jesus alive, or of gratitude to God who had raised him : My God and my Lord hath done this. But you will observe, it is expressly said that these words are addressed to Jesus, as an answer to what he had spoken, artsx^ie*} xm eirttv avt(i>; and our Lord, in his reply, considers them as a confession of Thomas's faith ; " Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed : Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." Either, therefore, the nominative is here as in many other places equivalent to the vocative, or the ellipsis is to be supplied by « ov. It is so natural to interpret these words as a declaration of Thomas's believing Jesus to be his God, that if our Lord had wished them not to be so understood, the ambiguity required a correction from him. But by accepting this declaration, and pronouncing his blessing upon those who, without the same evidence of sense, should make the same declaration, he approves of what Thomas had said, according to the obvious sense of the words, and teaches his followers, in succeeding ages, to acknow ledge him not only as their Master or Lord, but as their God. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 319 CHAPTER VII. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. The confession made by the apostle Thomas may be considered as an introduction to those plain assertions of the divinity of Jesus, which are found in the writings of the apostles after the ascension of their Master : and the words of that confession direct us to attend, in the first place, to those passages in which Jesus Christ is called God. But, before we begin to examine them particularly, it is proper to advert to a difficulty attending the argument that is founded upon them. Section I. If the name, God, were in Scripture appropriated exclusively to the Supreme Being, those passages of the New Testament in which it is applied to Jesus Christ, would afford an unequivocal proof that he is not a creature. But the fact is, that although God, in the strict and proper sense of that word, is the name of the Almighty, there is a loose or figurative sense, in which the use of it is very much extended. Admiration, which delights in magnifying its ob- jects, has often prompted men to speak of their fellow-creatures in language to which no mortal is entitled. The expression in Homer, t3o9fo; ^wf, we have copied in the epithets god-like and divine. By frequent use and by the progress of science these epithets have come to be regarded as figures of speech. But they were originally dictated by a principle which is most observable in ruder states of society, a proneness to consider all who discover eminent qualities, or extraor- dinary powers, as raised above the condition of human nature. The supposed existence of many of the heathen gods may be traced to this principle. The protectors and benefactors of their country, who had been admired during their life, were adored after their death, i. e. were enrolled amongst those higher orders of being, to whom it was conceived they had always been assimilated. Nay, there were in- stances in which the extravagance of flattery, and the excess of vanity which that flattery nourished, conspired in ascribing to a mortal, even while he remained upon earth, the name and honours of a god. The Scriptures, which must speak according to the sentiments and usages of those who are addressed, have adopted, in numberless places, this popular extension of the name of the Su- 320 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. preme Being. The first commandment is, Tiiou shalt have no other gods before me, as if any other could exist. The name, gods, is uniformly given in the Old Testament to those fictitious objects of worship before which the nations bowed ; and the apostle Paul, 1 Cor. viii. 5, at the very time that he says, " An idol is nothing in the world, and there is none other God but one," adds, " Though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, as there be gods many." The Hebrew word for gods is applied to the angels "who excel in strength," and who "dwell in heaven."* To rulers, because they are exalted above their subjects, it is said, " Ye are gods."t The belly of the sensualists, to the service of which they are devoted, is called their god :J and the Almighty himself says to Moses, Exod. vii. 1, " See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet," /. e. the king shall be astonished at the displays of thy power ; and the orders which thou shalt issue to him shall be delivered by the mouth of Aaron, who shall thus be thy prophet to Pharaoh. This extended figurative use of the name of God has suggested, to those who hold Jesus to be an exalted creature, the following system, which I give in the words of the author of the Essay on Spirit, p. 89. " As the self existent cause, of whom are all things, can alone be properly called God, when this title is given in the Scriptures to any other being but the Fatlier, we are to understand it only as expres- sive of some god-like power which hath been given or communicated to that being by God the Father. In this sense the application may be attributed to the Son, because, when all power in heaven and earth was given to him, he was made a god to those beings over whom that power was given." This system is supported by a remark borrowed from Sir Isaac Newton, and adopted by Dr. Clarke. " God," says Sir Isaac, " is a relative term, which has reference to subjects ; and the word deity denotes the dominion of God over sub- jects ;" and again, " we worship and adore God on account of his dominion." In like manner. Dr. Clarke, having laid it down as the 25th proposition in his scripture-doctrine of the Trinity, " The reason why the Son, in the Old Testament, is sometimes styled God, is not upon account of his metaphysical substance, how divine soever, but of his relative attributes and divine authority, communicated to him from the Father over us" — supports the proposition in the notes by the following reason — " The word God, when spoken of the Father himself, is never intended in Scripture to express philosophically his abstract metaphysical attributes, but to raise in us a notion of his attributes relative to us, his supreme dominion, authority, power, jus- tice, goodness," &c. However profound the respect is which every one, who has imbibed the rudiments of science, must entertain for the name of Sir Isaac Newton, you will probably find reason to think, when you examine his writings upon subjects not capable of strict demonstration, that in them, according to the expression used by Bishop Horsley, the editor of his mathematical works, the great Newton went out like a common man. It has been shown by Dr. Waterland, in his Vindication of Christ's Divinity, and by Dr. Ran- * Psalm viii. .5. -j- Psalm Ixxxii. 6. ^ Phil. iii. 19. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 321 dolph, in his Vindication of the Trinity, that the name God, when applied in Scripture to the Supreme Being, involves in it the notion of the excellence of his nature, his wisdom, power, eternity, and all- sufficiency. I need not mention any other Scripture-proof of this, than that decisive passage in Psalm xc. — " Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." Dr. Waterland observes, that although dominion enters into the notion of God, yet it is the excellence of the divine nature manifested to us in his works, which is the object of our adoration, and the foundation of his dominion over us : so that the whole idea of God is that of an eternal, unchangeable, almighty Ruler and Protector. " If," says Dr. Ran- dolph, p. 77, " God be only a relative term, which has reference to subjects, it follows, that when there were no subjects, there was no God; and, consequently, either the creatures must have been some of them eternal, or there must have been a time when there was no God. Again, as the creatures are none of them necessarily existent, it will follow that God himself does not exist necessarily; and if we suppose God to annihilate all creatures, he would thereby annihilate his own Deity, and cease to be God." Although this reasoning should satisfy you that the word God is not merely a relative term, but that, in its proper sense, it implies a transcendent and independent excellence of nature, yet, at the same time, you will perceive, that as it does imply dominion founded upon this excellence of nature, it may be used relatively. My God, is that being whose infinite perfections are employed in my protection, and are an object of trust and submission to me. You will perceive, also, from this account of its true meaning, how it may be applied in a loose figurative sense to those who resemble the Supreme Being in any part of the whole idea annexed to the word ; who have either attained any measure of the excellence of his nature, or who are intrusted by him with the exercise of any portion of his universal dominion. It appears, from what has been said, that much circumspection is necessary in drawing an argument for the divinity of Jesus from those passages in which he is styled God ; but it does not follow that the argument is necessarily inconclusive. There is hardly any word which is not occasionally used in a sense somewhat loose and figura- tive. It is one of the offices of sound criticism, to judge whether we are to interpret words and phrases more or less strictly ; and every accurate composition furnishes some discriminating circumstances which guide us in making this judgment. No person can be led into so gross a mistake as to think Moses truly a god, when the Almighty says to him, — " See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh ;" or civil magistrates truly partakers of a divine nature, when we read, " I said ye are gods ; but ye shall die like men ;" or the angels, however exalted above men, really like to God, when we read a command given them to worship another being ; or the idols, before whom the nations bowed, worthy of trust, when the prophets, at the same time that they call them gods, say they are vanity, the work of errors, and have no power to do good or evil. It may be expected, from the analogy of these instances, that if this name be given in an improper 2X 322 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. figurative sense to any other person, more especially if it be often so given, we shall, in some way, be efFectually guarded against mistake. The preservative, indeed, it has been said, against applying the term God in the highest sense to that person who is often called God, is to be found in those general declarations of Scripture that there is but one God : " Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord our Lord is one Lord." " There is none good but one, that is God." But a little attention will satisfy you that this preservative is not sufficient ; for the very person who is often called God in the New Testament, says, " I and the Father are one ;" and this declaration, taken in conjunction with the expres- sions of the Divine unity, has appeared to many pious Christians, and to many of the most able and inquisitive men in all ages, to teach this system, that although there be but one God, the Person to whom that name is often given in the New Testament, is, in the highest sense of the word, God. The general preservative being thus insuffi- cient to guard against mistake, if the highest sense of the word does not belong to that Person, there was much occasion for some marks of inferiority in the manner of its being applied to him which might suggest a lower sense. But if, instead of meeting with such marks we meet with circumstances in the manner of his being called God, which imply that the word, in the strict and most exalted sense, belongs to him ; and if the interpretation which we are thus led to give to the name correspond with other scripture proofs of the Divinity of the Person to whom it is applied, we cannot avoid con- cluding, that the Scriptures, by calling Jesus Christ God, meant to teach us that he is God. Let your examination of the texts which are commonly alleged for this purpose be scrupulous and suspicious. Every point of import- ance ought to be carefully examined ; and it is the great advantage which accrues from diversity of opinion, that you are both guarded against that supine indolence with which assent is yielded to points in which men are generally agreed, and that you are furnished with the best means of attaining the truth, by having an opportunity of opposing to one another the arguments which very able mfen have adduced upon either side. 1 shall not, therefore, barely enumerate the texts in which Jesus is plainly called God, but I shall endeavour, in canvassing their meaning, to exhibit a specimen of that kind of scripture-criticism, without the continued exercise of which you can neither arrive at certainty, nor give a good reason of your own opinions upon any of the disputed questions of theology. 1. The first text is contained in that passage at the beginning of John's Gospel, which has already been fully explained. The whole passage was then vindicated, from the Sabellian interpretation, by showing that o ^oyo? is a distinct person from the Father, the same who is called in the 17th verse Jesus Christ. It was observed that in the second clause of the first verse, o Myo^ rjv jt^o^ tov ®eov, the word ©foj occurs in the highest sense ; and that, as the form of the apostle's expression is to make the last word of one clause the first word of the succeeding, nothing but a purpose to mislead could have induced him, without any warning, to apply the name God to Jesus Christ in the beginning of the third clause, if he had meant it to be understood there in a sense different from that in which he had used it at the end of the DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 323 second. It was observed, further, that the want of the article makes no essential difference, both because the analogy of the Greek language requires that the article should be prefixed to the subject rather than to the predicate of a proposition ; and also, because Qeoi, without the article, in the following verses of this chapter, and in many other places, is used in the highest sense. I have only to add to these observations, that ©foj cannot be understood here merely as a relative term, because it is not said ©£05 fyti/tro 6 xoyoi, the word became, or was made God after the world was created ; but ©fo? rjv 6 ^oyoj, the word was God in the beginning, /. e. before he proceeded to make any thing, when there were no creatures and no subjects. Even Dr. Clarke, therefore, is obliged to paraphrase this expression thus : " Partaker of divine power and glory with and from the Father, not only before he was made flesh, or became man, but also before the world was." Now, if the manner in which the name God is here given to Jesus implies that the excellencies of the Divine nature belonged to him in the beginning when no creatures existed, and if there is no limitation of the degree in which he then possessed these excellencies, we seem warranted, by fair construction of the apostle's words, to infer from his being called God, that he is God. 2. The second passage is Acts xx. 28. u^osBx^'^f °^^ tav-toi^, xm Tiavei tCji }iocfivia>, cv 9 I'^uaj to livsvfjLa to ayiov sOsto ertiaxortovi, Hovfiaivsw trjv sxx'Krjraa.v tov ©£01), i]V ne^t,s7foirjrjato Sia tov ifitov alfiato^. The nominative to fte^iertoirjaato, which is not expressed in the Greek, and is supplied in our translation by the pronoun he, must be taken from the nearest substantive, ©sou. There is no other noun in the whole verse which admits of being made the nominative. But ®eov cannot here mean the Father ; for the doctrine of the gospel is, that we are redeemed or purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ. This is an action appropriated to him in all the descriptions of the method of our salvation. He took a body that he might shed his blood for us ; and the phrase •■Siov alfia, the blood which was proper, peculiar to him, is used also in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and there opposed to at;ua ax-Kot^iov, Heb. ix. 12, 25, to show that it was truly the blood of Christ, and of no other person^ that was shed. The nominative to fte^iSTtoirieiato, therefore, whatever the word be, must mean Jesus Christ; and consequently in this place he is called God. But it is proper to mention that the MSS. of the New Testament do not agree in reading ©ew. Grotius conjectures that the original reading was x^t^roi^, abbreviated into xov, and that out of xw came @ov, for ®eov. But this conjecture is unsupported by any autliority. Mr. Mill, who, in his most valuable edition of the Greek Testament, has collected the various readings, and mentioned the authorities by which every one of them is supported, informs us that some read xv^Lov ; others xv^wv xat, ®iov ; others, ©fou. Mr. Mill, who had access to judge of all the manuscripts, versions, and quotations in favour of each of the three, has no difficulty in preferring Q(ov as the best supported. Griesbach, the latest editor of the New Testament, pre- fers xv^i.ov, and says it is supported by the best and most ancient manu- scripts, by the most ancient versions, and by the fathers. There is not any reason, from the nature of the thing, for giving up our read- ing, fxxxrjmu. ®(ov ; it is a very common conjunction of words in the 324 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. New Testament, and God's purchasing the church with his own blood is an expression fully justified by the perfect union between the divine and human nature of Christ. At the same time, as xv^iov appears to be a very ancient reading, which may be traced as far back as the time of Irenaeus, in the second century, the present reading, however probable, cannot be certainly known to have been that which pro- ceeded from the apostle ; and no man who is guided purely by the love of truth, would choose to rest the divinity of our Saviour upon such questionable ground. 3. With regard to the next passage, Rom. ix. 5, there is no diffi- culty of this kind. Upon the authority of Mill, I say that all the manuscripts, and all the ancient versions support the present reading ; and Griesbach does not propose any various reading. It is quoted by the fathers both before and after the Council of Nice, as clear proof that Christ is God. And there does not appear the least ground for thinking that the text was ever read in any other manner. We are at liberty, therefore, to argue from the words as they now stand ; and the only question is, what is the true interpretation of them ? Dr. Clarke says, that the Greek words, being of ambiguous construc- tion, admit of three different renderings ; and I choose to quote him, because he expresses accurately and concisely what others have spread out more loosely. " They may signify either, of whom, as concern- ing the flesh, Christ came : God, who is over all, be blessed for ever. Amen : or. Of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all : God be blessed for ever. Amen : or, Of whom, as concern- ing the flesh, Christ came, who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen." He admits that the third rendering is the most obvious. But he inclines to prefer to it either the first or second, for these two reasons. 1. ^v\oyy;-toi is applied in Scripture to God the Father, and seems to have been used by the Jews as his proper name ; for the High Priest said to Jesus on his trial, Sd «6 x^wfoj, 6 wo; *ov iv%oyt^tov* 2. o frti rtav-tuv ©£0f was generally understood to be a title so peculiar to God the Father, that it could not be applied to the Son, without danger of Sabellianism, i. e. of confounding the person of the Father and Son. These are Dr. Clarke's reasons for preferring either of the two first renderings to the third. But you will observe the present question is, whether these two titles are here applied to Christ. It is not an answer to this question, to say that they are commonly applied to the Father. For it is possible, and there may be very good rea- sons for so doing, that names and titles which are generally appro- priated to the Father, should, in some places, be given to the Son. We may learn from such occasional applications that the two persons are equal, and yet by attending to the discriminating marks which the Scriptures furnish, we may be preserved from the danger of con- founding them. It remains, then, to be examined, Avhether the construction of the words warrants, or seems to require, that these titles be, in this place, applied to Christ. In order to judge of this, it will be of use to attend to the four following observations. 1. The first observation respects the clause to xata oa^xa. The apos- * Mark xiv. 61. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 325 tie, having expressed in the preceding verse the warmest afFection for the Israehtes, his countrymen, -Hf^v Gvyyivu,v ^ov xata in which case, the sense of several of the clauses will be forced and unnatural. The Gospel, " manifested in the flesli, seen of angels, received up into glory." If the word be o?? either the masculine of the relative, or the pronoun of the third person, it is not manifest who is meant. Jesus Christ, to whom, by this reading, all the clauses are referred, had not been mentioned in the preceding verse ; and it is not according to the manner of a perspicuous or grammatical writer, DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 327 to oblige his readers to educe an antecedent to ^j, out of the amount of the preceding clause /"*y» *<'''' *» ■^»?5 fnatSfta; nvattj^cov. There is, thus, internal evidence that some substantive noun, marking the person spoken of, is the nominative to the succession of verbs ; and all the Greek copies of tlie New Testament, except the two mentioned above, concur in reading ©to; as the nominative. It is true that we do not find this verse formally quoted in the Arian controversy till the end of the fourth century, so that we have not an opportunity of judging by early quotations what was the original reading. But besides the authority of the most ancient Greek MSS. in support of the word 0fo;, tliere is this further evidence for the genuineness of that reading, that if 0£O5 be the nominative, we can give an easy explication of every one of the clauses in perfect agreement with the analogy of facts, and the language of the most ancient writers. Having mentioned the MSS. of the New Testament, I shall notice, as a matter of curiosity, the state of the controverted word in the Alexandrian, one of the oldest and most respectable of these MSS, There has been some controversy with regard to the age of this manu- script. But there appears good reason to believe that it was written in the fourth century, not long after the Council of Nice, by the hand of an Egyptian lady. It was carried from Alexandria to Constanti- nople. It was given by the Patriarch of Constantinople to Charles I. of England, It is now deposited in the British Museum; and a fac simile, i. e. an edition in which the form of the letter is an exact representation of the original, has been published by Mr, Woide. To understand his description of the controverted word, it should be known that abbreviations of such words as frequently occur being common in the ancient MSS. there was written, instead of ©fos^ the Greek capital © and «. with a line above the two letters, as a mark of the abbreviation. Mr. Woide says, " While I am writing, and looking at this place, which has been often too imprudently touched by the finger, I can hardly distinguish any thing but the short line of aiibreviation, the point in the middle of the © now become faint, and some small remains of the circle round the point." Bishop Walton, who published a Polyglott edition of the New Testament, who has collected the various readings with great industry and fidelity, and who has mentioned the change upon this word in another MS. appears, by expressing no doubt with regard to the reading of ©fos in the Alexandrian MS. to have found it there in his time. Bishop Pearson, the very learned author of the Exposition of the Creed, says, that all the transverse line was even then so faint, that at first he thought the word was o?. yet, upon a narrower inspection, he saw marks which satisfied him, that there had been such a line ; and Mr. Woide says, that, on first inspecting the manuscript, he agreed in opinion with Mill, although, as the © is now almost wholly effaced, he cannot affirm the same from the present state of the MS. From this induction of particulars, it appears to be the opinion of the most learned men who have examined this subject, tliat ©fos is the genuine reading of the Alexandrian MS. coeval with the MS. itself. They think that the reading 05, arose from the faintness of the transverse line, and that 6; was changed into o, because the neuter antecedent nvattj^tov did not admit of a masculine relative. I observe that Gries- 328 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. bach prefers the reading oj, and has mtroduced it into the text : but I adhere to the opinion of former editors of the New Testament, sup- ported, as they say, both by the Alexandrian, and by other very ancient MSS. ; and you will observe, that if ®£os be the genuine read- ing in this passage, it affords an instance not only of the name being applied to Jesus, but of its being applied to him, when it is the subject, not the predicate of a proposition. This is an advantage in the argument for the divinity of Jesus, because those who contend that he is called God only in an inferior sense of that word, affirm that the word may be predicated of him, but that when it is the subject of a proposition, it is always the name of the Father. Dr. Clarke's 11th Proposition is, " The Scripture, when it mentions God absolutely and by way of eminence, always means the Person of the Father, particu- larly when it is the subject of a proposition." The reason of the rule is, that when the word is predicated of Jesus, we are taught by this very circumstance, that it is predicated of a Person different from the Supreme Being, to give it certain limitations ; but when it is the sub- ject of a proposition, it is of necessity stated absolutely, without any sign of limitation. This would be the reason, if the Scriptures did make such a distinction in the use of this word. But here is an instance in direct opposition to Dr. Clarke's rule, where the Father cannot be meant, because he was never manifested in the flesh, where the person meant is Jesus Christ, and God is stated as the subject of the propositions affirmed concerning this person. Dr. Clarke, indeed, aware probably that the present reading cannot upon any sufficient grounds be rejected, says that it is, in reality, of no importance ; for the sense is evident, that that Person was manifested in the flesh whom John, in the beginning of his Gospel, styles ©fos- But this is giving up his own distinction between the subject and the predicate of a proposition. For, in John, ®ios was the predicate ; here ©fo; is the subject : and, therefore, either the distinction which he made in his 11th Proposition is of no importance, or something more decisive with regard to the divinity of our Saviour is contained in this passage of Timothy than in the beginning of John's Gospel. 5. 1 John V. 20. In some manuscripts and versions, ^eov is inserted after axriOnov in this verse. This is of no importance to the sense. But there is a controversy with regard to the application of the last clause ; and that you may judge whether it is most natural to refer it to the Father, or to his Son Jesus Christ, T shall give two interpretations of it, in the words of Dr. Clarke and Dr. Randolph. Dr. Clarke's is, " The Son of God is come, and has enlightened Ihe eyes of our under- standing, that we may know the true God ; and we are in that true God by or through his Son Jesus Christ. This God, whom the Son has given us an understanding to know, is the true God, and to be in him by his Son is eternal life. This is the worship of the true God, and the way to eternal life." Dr. Randolph's is. This Jesus Christ, who hath " given us an understanding to know him that is true, is the true God and eternal life." By this interpretation, ovfojis referred to the antecedent immediately preceding, which is also the principal subject of the whole verse; the tautology which Dr. Clarke's para- phrase fixes upon the apostle, " The true God is the true God," is avoided; the strongest reason is given for our being in the true God DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 329 by Jesus Christ, that he himself is the true God, and so cannot mislead us : and, lastly, no more is affirmed concerning Jesus Christ than may be gathered from other places of John's writings. He is elsewhere called life.* "Eternal life," it is said, "is in the Son."t He is called God; he is called i> o.xriOivoi.X And if John meant to teach us tliat he who is called God is truly God, it was most natural for him to join this adjective to the substantive when speaking of the Son, in the same manner as when speaking of the Father. This text was urged in the Council of Nice agahist the Arians ; and they did not deny that Jesus Christ is here called the true God; but contented themselves with saying, that if he was truly made God, he is the true God : an evasion which, joined to many others, produced the inser- tion of the term Voovawj in the orthodox creeds, as a term necessarily implying that the Son had not been made God, but is essentially God. Section H. To those passages in which the name of God is given to Jesus Christ, there naturally succeed those which ascribe to him attributes that constitute the character of the being to whom that name belongs. The passages in which all power is ascribed to Jesus are innumera- ble ; and they are various and strong in point of expression. But to the argument for his divinity that is derived from the extent of his power, it is opposed by the Arian system, that the Almighty is the sole fountain of all the power that is exerted throughout the universe, that we behold various measures of power conmmnicated to the creatures with whom we converse, that the purposes of the divine government may require that a degree, infinitely beyond any which we behold, or which we can conceive, may be imparted to that being by whom God made, by whom he saves, and by whom he is to judge the world ; but that as all the power in heaven and in earth which is given to Jesus Christ was derived from God, it redounds to the honour of Him from whom it proceeds, and does not, in fair argument, prove the divinity of him by whom it is received. This argument will ap- pear to many to be counterbalanced by the manner in which the Scriptures speak of the power of Jesus. They will think it not likely that, if Jesus were a creature, any exertion which he was enabled to perform would be described in language by which they are assimilated, both in the greatness and facility' of them, to those of the Creator. But as this language may not make the same impression upon every mind, and as it was acknowledged by Jesus, and is often said by his apostles, that he received all power from God, we require, in arguing from the attributes of Jesus to his divinity, some attributes which do not admit of the same communication as power does, some which respect rather the manner of his being, than the extent of his exer- tions. You may attend, first, to the time of his being. If Jesus is the Creator of all, it follows that he existed before any of those measures * 1 John i. 2. t 1 John v. 11. . + Rev. iii. 7, 14. 30* 2 Y 330 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD, of time which are deduced from the motion or succession of created objects. In this sense the Arians allow eternity to Jesus, saying that he was begotten rt^oTtavrioj/attovwi'. But the Scriptures do not admit of any equivocation with regard to this attribute of Jesus, because the very same terms in which the eternity of God is described are applied to him ; so that if the Scriptures are not sufficient to prove the eternity of the Son, neither do they prove the eternity of the Father. Tlie ancients, all of whom applied the description of wisdom in Proverbs viii. to that person whom John calls -Koyoi-, argued from the similarity between Psalm xc. 2, " Before the mountains were brought forth, thou art God ;" and a part of that chapter, " I was set up from everlasting, from the begiiming, or ever the earth was." If we con- sider that Christ is only a beautiful personification of wisdom, we shall not admit the force of this argument. But there are plain de- clarations to the same purpose in the book of the Revelation. And you will observe the reason why in that book they become plain. In the conversations with the apostles which the gospels record, Jesus purposely obscured his divinity, because he was with them in the human form. But when Stephen, before his martyrdom, " looked up steadfastly to heaven, he saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God." When Jesus appeared to Paul after his ascension, " there was at mid-day a light from heaven above the brightness of the sun ;" and out of that light the Lord spake to Paul, saying, " I am Jesus whom thou persecutest." In both instances, it was tlie full efl^ulgence of the Schechinah, which every Jew regarded as the visible symbol of the divine presence. In like manner, in the book of the Revelation, Jesus speaks to his servant John from heaven in his glorified state. In the description of the person whom John saw, the most splendid objects in nature are brought together to con- vey some conception of his majesty. The brightness of the sun is the image of his countenance ; his eyes are like a flame of fire ; in his hand he wields seven stars ; and when he speaks, it is not the weak sound of man's voice ; it is as the sound of many waters, loud, con- tinued, and impetuous. The manner in which Jesus speaks of him- self. Rev. i. 7, 8, corresponds most properly to this description of his Majesty. It has been doubted whether the person speaking in the 8th verse is the Father or the Son. But you will find when you con- sider the whole passage, that by applying this verse to the Father there is a most abrupt change of person ; whereas the context leads us to consider Jesus Christ, the person who is described in the 7th verse, and who begins to speak to John at the 11th, as giving this account of himself in the 8th. The only reason for not following the direction of the context, in applying this 8th verse to Jesus Christ, is that the two last titles here introduced are considered as peculiar to the Father. But it has been clearly shown that this reason proceeds upon a mistake. 'Otov, xato ijv, xat 0 i^xo^ifvoi, is indeed used in the 4th verse, as the distinguishing cha- racter of the Father. But it is known by the learned that the amomit of these words is the full exposition of the name Jehovah. Now ve found, by comparing the Old and New Testament, many places in which the name Jehovah is given to Jesus ; and our Lord seems to take it to himself by the peculiarity of that expression, John viii. 5S, DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 331 rt^iv A6^cm^i yevsaeac, not fyw jji"* but«y""iUi' Yiavtox^atu^, a word express- ing the most exalted power and the most universal dominion, the sovereign and proprietor of all, is used occasionally by the Septua- gint as the translation of the same Hebrew phrase which they else- where render. Lord of Hosts, xv^ios Swa^utuv. But there are many places in the Old Testament, where that Hebrew phrase is applied to the an- gel of the covenant ; and we learned from John xii. 41, that the glory of the Lord of hosts which Isaiah saw was the glory of Christ. The application, then, of the two last titles to Jesus does not atlbrd any reason for transferring tlie whole verse from the Son to the Father ; and the two first titles are elsewhere assumed by the Son as his.* " I am the first and the last." " I am A and ^, the beginning and the end." But these are the very descriptions which the Father gives of his eternity. Isaiah xliv. 6, " I am the first ; and I am the last ; and beside me there is no God." Isaiah xliii. 10, " liefore me was there no God formed, neither shall there be after me ;" titles which, both by their natural import, and by their being consecrated as the description of God the Father, imply that a being to whom they are applied had no beginning, and shall have no end. As the existence of Jesus is thus affirmed to be without beginning, so the Scriptures declare that it is not susceptible of change. An un- changeable existence is the character of Him " who is, who was, and who is to come." And the same thing, which is clearly implied in this name, is directly expressed in that part of Psalm cii. which we found the apostle to the Hebrews in the first chapter applying to Jesus. " Thou art the same, and thy years fail not :" and to this cor- responds another expression, Heb. xiii. 8, l>?3oi>s X^tcrroj xOfs xm arjiAt^ov oavTos, xat £ts -r'ovs atwraj. For, although the Ariaus understand these words to mean nothing more than this, that the doctrine of Christ is unchangeable, yet it is plain that this is a figurative sense of the words; that, according to the literal interpretation, they teach that the person of Jesus Christ is the same in all times, past, present, and future; that this literal meaning is the only sense which the words in the first chapter will bear ; and that the unchangeableness of his person is the surest foundation of the michangeableness of his doctrine. It is not easy for any one who attends to these things to believe that the apos- tle, in commending the steadfastness with which Christians ought to adhere to the faith, would choose to introduce an expression which so naturally leads his hearers to ascribe immutability to the author of that faith, if Jesus were not truly exempt from all the vicissitudes that are inseparable from created beings. An existence thus without beginning, and continued in all times without change, is represented also as extended through all space. While it is the essential condition of a creature to inhabit the spot assigned him, or to change his habitation according to the will of his Creator, and thus to be only in one place at one time, Jesus says of llimself, John iii. 1 3, o fsc tov ov^avov xata6asi o uio; roD avO^uirCov o cof tv ■ta ot'^avoi : words which, according to their most natural exposition, imply that he who came down from heaven is in heaven. He promises. Matt. Xviii. 20, ov 70^ fi3t dvo rj t^iis awr,yixii>oi. ft; to ty.ov ovofia, ixit etfit iv jwtff^ avtuv. • Rev. i. 17j iii. 14; xxii. 13. 332 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. He had said, that his gospel was to be preached in all the world* The fact has corresponded to the prophecy. Yet here is his promise, that in every place where his disciples are assembled, there he is ; and in like manner he said to his apostles, when he was just about to ascend, Matt. XXViii. 20, tSov, «y« ficd'' vfiu>v ttfii Ttasas ras ^lUfgay, £uj T'jys aw- ttuia-i i-ov atwi^os . It cauuot be said by any one who understands the terms which he uses, that omnipresence, like power, may be commu- nicated to a being who, in some former period of his existence, did not possess it. But even this assertion is precluded by the Scriptures, which ascribe this essential attribute to Jesus from the beginning, *» Tiavta £v avtai avvestj^xi; woi'ds which imply that his existence, since the creation, is co-extended with his works. This extended existence is connected with the continued exercise of the most perfect intelligence. The knowledge possessed by the most exalted spirits must be limited in proportion to the bounds of the space which they inhabit. At least, their knowledge of any thing beyond that space cannot be immediate, but must be communicated to them by other beings, or acquired by investigation. But of Jesus Christ it is said, that he knoweth all things ; that he knows that God who is incomprehensible to man; that he knows what is in man.* His knowledge extends to that region which is removed from the eyes of mortals, and the knowledge and judgment of which the Al- mighty reserves to himself as his prerogative. " Thou, even thou only," says Solomon, 1 Kings viii. 39, "knowest the hearts of all the children of men." " I the Lord," says the Almighty, Jer. xvii. 10, " search the heart, I try the reins." But Jesus, who, while he was upon earth, had discovered in numberless instances his know- ledge of the heart, claims, in the book of the Revelation, this divine prerogative as his own. Rev. ii. 23. "All the churches shall know," tfosyui c^fjiv u c^svvuv vi^^ovs xM xa^Sias" — And there is a description of o xoyo^ tov ©£ov, Heb. iv. 12, 13, which all the ancients apply to Christ the Word, in which it is said that the Word is " a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart : and that there is no creature that is not manifest in his sight." Thus we find the Scriptures ascribing to Jesus an existence with- out beginning, without change, without limitation, and connected, in the whole extent of space which it fills, with the exercise of the most perfect intelligence. These are the essential attributes of Deity. Measures of power may be communicated ; degrees of wisdom and goodness may be imparted to created spirits : but our conceptions of God are confounded, and we lose sight of every circumstance by which he is characterized, if such a manner of existence as we have now described be common to him and any creature. When we recollect that the Person to whom this manner of existence is ascribed is the Creator of the world; that by him all the intercourse between the Deity and the human race has been carried on from the begin- ning ; that in the Old Testament he often bears the incommunicable name Jehovah, and that in the New Testament he is called God, in the proper sense of that word : when we lay together these tilings, which are the premises that have been established, the conclusion • Matt. xi. 27. John ii. 24, 25. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 333 appears to be clear. The Scriptures mean to teach us that this Person is God : and this conclusion will be confirmed when we find that in Scripture he is worshipped as God. Section III. This remaining ground of argument upon the subject of our Saviour's divinity, it is proper that I should state fully, on account of the diiferent opinions to which it has given occasion, and the extent of some of the discussions in which the different opinions have been supported. It appears to be agreeable to reason that worship, which is the humblest expression of entire veneration, and of a sense of depend- ence, should be appropriated to the Supreme Being. It was the character of heathen idolatry that even those, who believed in one Being, far exalted in power and dignity above every other, gave to inferior deities, testimonies of respect and submission the same in kind with those which he received. It was the great object of the law of Moses to form a people, who, instead of going after other gods, and bowing down before them, should confine their worship to the one Lord, the God of Israel. Hence the books of the Old Testament abound with descriptions of the vanity of idols : the Almighty is there known by the name Jealous, claiming worship as his incommunica- ble right ; and the spirit of the whole institution is thus expressed by Isaiah xlii. 8 : " I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another." This spirit of the law seems to be incorporat- ed into the gospel, since our Lord, upon being tempted by the devil to worship him, says, " Get thee hence, Satan ; for it is written. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."* And, upon being asked. Which is the first commandment of all Pf he began his answer thus : " The first of all the commandments is, Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." Upon a comparison of these quotations, it seems to be obvious that our Lord meant to exclude every other being from a competition with the Lord God, either in the affections of the heart, or in that expression of those affections, which is commonly called worship. Yet the Apostle to the Hebrews, i. 6, applies to Jesus Christ these words of the Psalmist, " let all the angels of God worship him," Our Lord says, John v. 23, "that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father ;" words which may imply an equality in the degree, and a sameness in the expressions of honour. The Apostle to the Philippians, ii. 10, says, "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow." During our Lord's intercourse with his apostles, the astonishment excited in their breasts by some of his works, produced expressions of reverence, which implied at least a momentary apprehension of his divine character ; and as he was carried up from them into heaven, " they worshipped him."t ♦ Mat. iv. 10. f Mark xii. 29. t Luke xxiv. 52. 334 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. The last words of the martyr Stephen were, " Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Lord, lay not this sin to their charge."* The Epistles contain many petitions which are directly addressed to Jesus, and in which his name is conjoined with that of God the Father. In the book of the Revelation, Jesus receives the adoration of all the host of heaven. The twenty-four elders, who fall down before him that sitteth on the throne, fall down before the Lamb also ; and John heard every creature in heaven saying," Blessing and glory be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb, for ever and ever."t The Christian church, following these examples in Scripture, introduces the name of Jesus into the earliest doxologies that are recorded. Mf^' ov ao<, 5o|a, xai Ha, wyi,(^ Tivtvyiaii, and Sot 8o|a, xai 7'9 (T9 rtotSt ijjtfou, xat to, ayt9 rtviv^ati, are fomis fouud in the writings of Clemens Romanus, one of the apostolical fathers ; and the conclusion of the prayer of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, which is preserved in a letter from the church of Smyrna, giving an account of his suflerings in the second century, runs thus : Ij^otd x.^io-tov -tov ayarfjjfou oov rtatSoj- hi w cou cw avta (V rCvivixatv ayto 6o|a xai vuv, xa(, stj t'odj jxtM-ovta^ andi'a$. Aja-i^v. Thcse doxologies of Clemens and Polycarp were not peculiar to them, but were agreeable to the practice of the church in their days ; and from this venerable authority is derived that form of words which appears to have been used through all the ages of the Christian church, and is often repeated in the English liturgy, " Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost." This account of the early doxologies is confirmed by Pliny, in his letter to Trajan, about the beginning of the second century, when, speaking of the Christians, he says, "Affirmabanthancfuissesummam vel cnlpae suae, vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire ; carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere secum invicem."J And Eusebius appears to be describing this carmen, or " the psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs," of which the Apostle Paul speaks, Eph. V. 19, when he says in the fourth century, ■i.ox^oi xm uSm a6t%^uv arCa^XV^ "^^o rtitfT'coi/ y^a^f tffat, tov T^oyov tov &eov, tov "K^iatov i/A-vovei dco%o-^'ovi>tei.§ Although the Christians, in the earliest times, honoured the memory of martyrs, by meeting at the places where they had suffered, by celebrating the anniversary days of their martyrdom, and by recom- mending the imitation of their example, they distinguished most scrupulously the honours which they paid to mortals from the worship which is due to God. For their principle, as it is expressed at a later period by Origen, was this, " God only is to be worshipped : other beings may be tifir;; a|ia, ov fnv xcu Tt^oaxwrjatics xau aiGasixov" And yet, notwithstanding this distinction, the tM''o verbs rc^ooxweiv 3.ndoi8eaeai. are used by Justin Martyr in the second century to express the homage which belongs to the Son and the Spirit, as well as that which belongs to the Father. When the Christians were charged with atheism, because they did not worship idols, Justin Martyr answered, " We acknowledge that we are atheists in respect of those who are com- monly called gods, but not in respect to the true God, the Father of * Acts vii. 59, 60. t Rev. v. 13. i Plin. Epist. Lib. X 97. § Eus. Hist. Ecc. Lib. V. cap. 28. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 335 all ; both him, and the Son who came from him, and the prophetical Spirit, OiSojXiOa, xa.1 rc^oaxM'Ot'ixii', ^.oy^ xai aXrfida •rtfttoi-rs;. * The particulars which I have mentioned may suffice as a specimen of the sentiments and practice of the first tln-ee centuries. I do not propose to entangle myself in that controversy with regard to the meaning of particular passages, which Dr. Priestley's hasty and super- ficial History of Early Opinions concerning Jesus Christ has occasioned. It appears to me that this inaccuracy has been completely exposed by his able and learned antagonists, and that the more carefully any one examines the records which are preserved in the earliest Christian writers, he will be the more fully satisfied of the following points : that although a few individuals had begun, even then, to disseminate other opinions concerning the person of Christ, yet the great body of the Christian church considered him as entitled to receive the same worship with the Father, and were accustomed, in ditferent parts of their public services of devotion, to ascribe this worship to him ; that his title to this worship was in their minds connected with the divinity of his nature ; and that the principle upon which their practice rested was the same wliich is expressed in the fourth century by Cyril, who, when the Christians were accused by the Emperor Julian of worship- phig, like the Heathen, a dead man, thus answered: "We do not make a god of a man, but we worship him who is essentially God, and on that account, is fit to be worshipped."! This being the principle upon which the Christian church from the earliest times had worshipped our Saviour, when the Arians, in the fourth century, avowedly taught that Jesus Christ is a creature, and yet joined with other Christians in worshipping him, Athanasius, and all those writers who held the received opinion concerning his Person, charged them with idolatry, the same in kind as that which was practised among the heathen. Their argument was this. Heathen idolatry did not consist in ascribing the same dignity and rank to all the multiplicity of gods who were worshipped ; for the cosmogony of the philosophers, which always exhibited some theory of the gods as a branch of the system of nature, generally proceeded upon the sup- position of there being d^ ayiwri-eosixa.!. rtoVKoi ytwri-tot,; and the popular traditionary theology of the poets, and the vulgar exalted the Father of gods and men far above the otlier objects of worship. i3ut heathen idolatry consisted in this, that the same kind of worship was paid to deities who were acknowledged to be inferior and produced, as to that Being who was called supreme ; and that men, proceeding gradually in this prostitution of that which belongs exclusively to one unorigi- nate Intelligence, came to worship animals which had their birth upon earth, and even inanimate objects, which, however splendid or useful, are confessedly the workmanship of some mind. This is the very account of the idolatry of the heathen which the Apostle Paul gives, Rom. i. 25, when he says, Eat6a59>;(7ai' xai fXar^fvaaf t-Q xnati. Tia^a rov x-ei.rsa.vt a.', not as in our translation, " worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator ;" but, " by the side of the Creator, along with him." But these words, in which the ajiostle most accurately describes the practice of the heathen, may be literally applied to the Arians. For • Apol. Prima, p. 11. \ Cyril, cont. Jul. Lib. VI. p. 203. Ed. Lips. 336 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. ill their zeal to maintain the honour of God the Father, they had represented hiin as having, by an act of his will, produced out of nothing that glorious being who is called the Son, and after having thus separated the Son from the Father, as far as a creature is neces- sarily separated from the Creator, they worshipped this creature, t^at^Bvaav ty xtiati, rta^a tov xtioavta. It is truc that the heathen worshipped many created beings in conjunction with one supreme, whereas the Arians worshipped only one : but this circumstance did not constitute any essential difference between them. The principle upon which the Arians worshipped Christ was so far from being repugnant to the worship of other created beings, that it naturally led to this extension of worship. For, as Athanasius reasons, if Christ is worshipped on account of the superior eminence of his glory, it follows that every inferior being ought to worship its superior ; au' ovx sativ oitus- xtisfiari. Such was the reasoning of Athanasius and the writers of his day, when they accused the Arians of idolatry, for worshipping a being whom they considered as a creature. The answer which was then made to the charge is not extant, for almost all the writings of the ancient Arians are lost. But if we may judge of their answer from the replies of their adversaries, it appears to have been the same with that which is found in the writings of those who in later times have held their opinions. The modern Arians attempt to vindicate themselves from the charge of idolatry by making a distinction between the worship which they pay to God the Father, and that which they pay to the Son : the former they call supreme divine worship, the latter inferior religious worship. You will find amongst the tracts of Mr. Thomas Emlyn, a sincere and zealous assertor of Arian principles in the beginning of the eighteenth century, a treatise entitled, A Vindication of the wor- ship of the Lord Jesus Christ on Unitarian principles. The plan of the treatise is to show, that supreme divine worship is, in Scripture, neither given nor required to be given to Jesus Christ; that the inferior religious worship of him, which the Scriptures allow and command, does not intrench upon the peculiar prerogative of God ; and that as this mark of honour to the Saviour of the world, which the Scriptures expressly warrant, cannot be called will-worship, so it does not afford any sanction to Pagan or Popish idolatry. A distinc- tion of the same kind is the subject of several of those propositions in which Dr. Clarke sets forth what he calls the Scripture doctrine of the Trinity ; and this is his manner of stating it. " Supreme honour or worship is due to the person of the Father singly ; and all prayers and praises ought primarily or ultimately to be directed to the person of the Father : the honour which the Scriptures direct to be paid to the Son is upon account of his actions and attributes relative to us, in accomplishing the dispensation of God towards mankind, and must always be understood as redounding ultimately to the glory of God the Father." The Roman Catholics employ the same distinction between supreme and inferior worship in vindication of their worshipping angels, the * Athan. Orat. II. 23. DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 337 virgin Mary, and departed saints. They have marked the distinction by >.ar^aa, and fijvJma, two words which were used promiscuously iu ancient times, but which are carefully separated in the church of Rome ; the first being employed to express that worship which belongs to the Supreme Being, the Creator and Preserver of all ; the second, to express that inferior worship which it appears to them lawful and fit to yield to beings created by God. Tiiey admit, that the practice of the heathen deserves the severest condemnation, be- cause it was fiStoxoxat^fca, i. e. idololatria, giving the highest worship to idols ; but they contend that no part of their practice deserves the name of idolatry, because it is only bovxna. which they pay to any of the creatures whom they worship. It is of no importance in the present argument, to investigate at what period of the Christian church the distinction of these two words was invented. It is manifest that the distinction was unknown to the apostle Paul ; for speaking of the heathen, he says in one place, iXaf^ivaav trj xti,6e(, r'aga tov xtioavta. '■,* in ailOtiier, i?io\i%iv6a.ti roij ft>; ^vcJf t ov?t ^fo.j.f Athanasius and the writers of his day appear to have followed the Scripture in the promiscuous use of the two words; and the whole train of reasoning which they employ against the Arians shows that they were ignorant of that distinction betwixt supreme and in- ferior worship, which the two words have been employed to mark. The fallacy of the distinction has been fully exposed by the learned Bishop Stillingfleet, in several places of his works, and particularly in his Discourse concerning the nature of Idolatry. It is touched upon occasionally by Dr. Cudworth, in his valuable work, entitled The In- tellectual System of the Universe : and it is stated at great length and with much perspicuity, by Dr. Waterland, in his reply to Dr. Clarke, and by the other writers whom the revival of the Arian controversy in the last century has called forth in defence of the ancient faith of the church. The arguments, opposed by the Athanasian writers to the answers by which the Arians endeavour to exculpate themselves from the charge of idolatry, may thus be stated in few words. There is no intimation in Scripture of any distinction between supreme or ultimate, and inferior or relative worship. On the other hand, worship, which is the expression of that veneration and submission of soul that is due to God, is represented in Scripture as consisting of certain outward acts, such as adoration, prayer, offering sacrifice, burning incense, and making vows ; all which acts are cleaily discriminated from expres- sions of the respect due to creatures. Instead of allowing these acts of worship to be performed to creatures upon this provision that they ultimately tend to his glory, the Almighty hath chosen to guard the honour of his great name by claiming them as exclusively his own ; and we are not left to distinguish an act of worship performed to a creature, from the same act performed to the Creator, by the difference of intention, the different degrees of esteem which accompany the act : but we are required to follow the precise rule laid down in Scripture, according to which the worship of a creature never can agree with the worship of the Creator, but is directly opposite to it, being an in- * Rom. i. 25. f Gal. iv. 8. 31 2 Z 338 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. vasion of the prerogative of the Supreme Being. The character which Paul gives of the heathen, is, (dovuvcats -fot? htj q>vai(, moc ^loii ,■ and Christians, says one Father, return to heathenism, ■?» xtian cwavanj^ixovtii ■cov fu(5£t ©iov. " Either, therefore," says another, " let the Arians cease to worship him whom they call a creature, or cease to call him a creature whom they worship, lest, under the name of worship, they be found to commit sacrilege." Such is the state of the argument upon both sides, in the Arian controversy with regard to the worship of Christ. I have now to direct your attention to the form which this subject has assumed in the Socinian controversy. When Socinus, about the end of the sixteenth century, revived that opinion which had been broached by a few individuals in the first century, that Christ was a mere man, he did not so far depart from the practice of the Christian church as to deny that Christ ought to be worshipped. But having represented the title of Christ to worship, as founded upon that universal dominion with which he was invested after the resurrection, Socinus endeavoured to show, that there is no instance in Scripture of our Saviour's being worshipped prior to his resurrection, and that all the instances of worship paid to him posterior to that period have a reference to the glory and power to which he was then exalted in consequence of the actions which he had done upon earth; and he maintained that, independently of any positive precept, the kingdom which our Lord received, and the authority which he continues to exercise in relation to us, create an obligation upon Christians to worship him. Several of those, who held the same opinion with Socinus concerning the person of Christ, did not agree with him in this speculation. They contended that if Christ be merely a man he never can be entitled to any other kind of honour than that which is due to human excellence, and that no degree of exaltation is a sufficient warrant to his disciples for ascribing to him that worship which belongs to God. Socinus did not perceive or did not choose to admit that this was a consequence which flowed from his principles. There is extant in his works a dispute between him and Franciscus Davides upon this subject. The dispute ended, like most others, without changing the opinion of either of the parties : Socinus continued to inveigh against those who refused to worship Christ ; and he gave his consent that Franciscus Davides should be suspended from his public ministry, merely for his teaching that Christ ought not to be worshipped. But there is so manifest a repugnancy between the worship of Christ and the pure principles of Socinianism, that it was impossible for any authority to preserve this branch of the practice of Socinus amongst those who received and followed out his system. Accord- ingly, Dr. Priestley, Mr. Lindsey, and all the Socinians of the last century, who call themselves Unitarians, have openly disclaimed the worship of Christ. While they profess the highest veneration for the name of Socinus, they consider his zeal for defending the worship of Christ, as either an accommodation to established opinion, whicli he judged prudent at the first introduction of his system, or as a degree of prejudice and weakness of which even his mind was unable to divest itself: and they remove what they call an imperfection which DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. 339 adhered to the first sketch of the Socinian doctrine, by avowing as their principle, that religious worship is to be otfered to one God the Father only, as his incommunicable honour and prerogative. Their chief objections to the liturgy of the church of England amount to this, that it contains prayers addressed to Jesus Christ ; and their prac- tice in their meetings is to avoid every form of words which seems to imply that he is an object of worship. The arguments by which the modern Unitarians vindicate this practice, appear to derive considerable advantage from the different acceptations of n^o^xwiu, the word which, both in the Septuagint and in the New Testament, is translated worship. It sometimes marks adoration, and sometimes nothing more than that prostration of the body which was common in eastern countries upon the appearance of a superior. It is used in this last sense by Herodotus,* and even in the Old Testament. Thus, 1 Chron. xxix. 20, we read, " that all the congregation bowed down their heads, and worshipped the Lord and the king, /. e. they bowed their bodies in testimony of reverence both for the God and the king of Israel. Nay, in one of our Lord's parables. Matt, xviii. 26, it is said, that the servant falling down be- fore his Master, " rt^o'^mwd aira)." But the advantage which the Uni- tarians derive from this ambiguous use of the Greek word is more apparent than real. For besides that circumstances will almost always clearly indicate whether the action marked by ft^or^xweio expresses, in that case, religious homage, or merely the highest degree of civil re- spect, we derive our warrant for worshipping Christ not simply from the application of that word, but from a variety of acts which, al- though they are by no means implied in the literal sense of rt^oaxwiu, go to make up the general notion of worship, and in which there is nothing equivocal. We say that there are in Scripture many instances of praise, thanksgiving, and prayer, being addressed to Jesus, all of which imply a conviction in the worshippers that his knowledge and power are not limited, and that he is every where present : and from these instances, taken in conjunction with the command to honour him even as we honour the Father,t and with the revelation of the glory of his character, and his relation to us, we infer that it is not only lawful, but proper for Christians to worship him. The Unitarians endeavour to invalidate this conclusion by a labour- ed attempt to explain the Scriptures in a consistency with their own system. They say, that the thanksgivings which we quote are mere effusions of gratitude ; that the prayers are only wishes ; that the in- vocation of Stephen in the book of Acts, and the doxologies in the book of the Revelation were addressed to Jesus when he was pre- sent, and do not warrant us to pray to him or praise him when he is absent. It is impossible to enter into the detail of tiieir criticisms. But if you take the instances of worship being paid to Jesus, which Dr. Clarke has very fairly collected in his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, and read at the same time the commentaries upon these texts, which Mr. Lindsey has inserted in the sequel to his Apology, and in a separate dissertation upon this subject, you will have an excellent specimen of that kind of Scripture criticism which the Socinians are * Herod. Polym. 136. -j- John v. 23. 340 DIRECT PROOFS THAT CHRIST IS GOD. often obliged to employ in defence of different parts of their system, and which, in giving a sense of Scripture far from being obvious, re- quires such an expense of ingenuity as has always appeared to me to be of itself a sufficient proof that their opinions are not founded in Scripture. The controversy between the Athanasians, the Arians, and the So- cinians, upon the points of which we have been speaking, may be thus shortly stated. The Athanasian syllogism is, none but God ought to be worshipped : Jesus Christ is worshipped in Scripture ; therefore he is God. The Arian syllogism is, supreme worship is due to God, but inferior worship may be paid to a creature : It is only inferior worship that is paid to Jesus Christ in Scripture ; therefore, although he be worshipped, he is a creature. The Socinian syllogism is, none but God ought to be worshipped : Christ is not God ; there- fore all the passages of Scripture, which seem to ascribe worship to him, are to be explained in such a sense as to be consistent with this conclusion. The Socinians adopt the major proposition of the Atha- nasian syllogism, that Christ is not to be worshipped. The Arians deny it. The manner in which the Arians attempt to evade the force of the major proposition is by a distinction which, we say, has no founda- tion in Scripture. The manner in which the Socinians attempt to evade the force of the minor proposition is by a kind of criticism which, we say, does violence to Scripture, If it shall appear to you, upon examining the subject, that we are right in saying so, you will be struck with the simplicity and consistency of the Athanasian sys- tem. According to that system, the Scriptures having ascribed to Jesus the jiames, the attributes, and the actions of God, and having expressly declared that he is God, give us a practical proof that those whom the Spirit guided into all truth, considered him as God, by their paying him that Avorship which the Scriptures declare to be the in- communicable prerogative of the Supreme Being. Here is a chain of argument in which nothing appears to be wanting. All the parts of it hang together, and support one another. It produced a convic- tion of the divinity of our Saviour in the minds of those to whom it was first proposed ; and the authority of example, the respect which it is natural for us to pay to the opinions of those who were placed in a most favourable situation for judging, is thus superinduced to warrant that conclusion which the declarations of Scripture appear to us to establish, that Jesus Christ is truly and essentially God. UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 341 CHAPTER VIII. UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. It is one part of the third opinion concerning the person of Christ, that he is truly God. But the whole history of his life exhibits hun as a man; and the constant language of Scripture upon this head, which has led the Socinians to consider him as merely a man, is the ground of the other part of the third opinion concermng his person, that he is not only truly God, but also truly man. ^ . , ^ . The proofs of the human nature of Christ found in the Scriptures, are obvious to the plainest understanding ; and whatever difficulties may occur to those who attempt to speculate upon the subject, the opinion itself has been generally held in the Christian church. Although Jesus upon some occasions assumes this exalted title, tne Son of God," he generally calls himself by a name most significant of his humanity, " the Son of man." We found by an analysis of the beginning of John's gospel, that " the Word," who " m the beginnmg was with God, and was God," is called Jesus Christ; and we read elsewhere of Jesus Christ, that he was " wearied with his journey, that " he was hungry,"t that " he ate and drank,"J that his soul was " exceeding sorroWful even unto death,"§ that " he gave up the ghost, that he was buried, and that he rose from the grave. 1| These propositions, so opposite to one another, imply a correspond- in'^ ditference of nature in the person concerning whom all ot them are affirmed. There is an illusion throughout the New Testament, if he who made the worlds, and he who " was an hungered, is not the same person ; and yet we have seen that he who made the worlds was God, and we cannot doubt that he who was an hungered was man. The inference thus clearly drawn, from laying difterent passages together, is confirmed by an examination of those places which present in one view the divine and the human nature ot the man Christ Jesus. Of this kind are the three following. Johni 14 Kai 6 xoyo5 ao^l .ya.'aT'o. The Socinians, in conformity to their interpretation of the first part of the chapter, understand this phrase to mean nothing more than that the reason or wisdom ot God resided in the man Jesus Christ, and might thus figuratively be said to have become flesh. But all those, both Athanasians and Arians, who consider J^oyo^ in the first verse as denoting a person, must under- stand what is here said of him as meaning, " this person became • John iv. 6. t Mark xi. 12. + Mark ii. 14. § Matth. xxvi. 38. II John xix. xx. 31* 342 UNION OP NATURES IN CHRIST. flesh, or was incarnate." And all that is said of the ?-o-,o; in the former verse may be applied to the person who, at a certain time, became flesh. Phil. ii. 6, 7, 8. The apostle is recommending to Christians humility, from the example of Jesus Christ, " Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus." In order to explain what mind was in Christ, or what degree of humility he exhibited, the apostle describes two different states of Christ, one which he resigned, and another to which he submitted ; and his humility consisted in descending from the one to the other. The first state is expressed by this phrase, oj IP fto^fyj @iov i^a^x^v. The Socinians, who do not admit that Jesus Christ ever was in any state more dignified than that of a man, have no other mode of explaining this phrase, but by applying it to those extraordinary displays of divine wisdom and power which Jesus exhibited upon earth, and by which he who was merely a man, appeared to the eyes of the beholders to be a God. But this interpretation, besides that it is by no means adequate to the import of the phrase, inverts the order, and impairs the force of the whole passage. It represents the /uo^f? ®«oi' as posterior to the xivMoii, and the humility of Christ as consisting purely in this, that he did not employ his extraordinary powers in preserving his life. Whereas the fto^4"? ®iov appears intended by the apostle to represent a state prior to tlie xsvcoac^, by which means the whole of Christ's appearance upon earth becomes an example of humility. The Arians, who admit that Jesus Christ often appeared under the Old Testament, in the person, and by the name of Jehovah, employ these appearances to explain this phrase, " Who, being before his incarnation in the form of God, appeared durhig his life in the form of a man." The Athanasians, who believe that Jesus is essentially God, understand by no^^r; @cov, not a character which he occasionally personated, but those glories of the divine nature which from eternity belonged to him, which, in reference to the phrase used in the 4th verse, may be called T'ttlor-fov, and which correspond to the concluding clause of the 6th verse, to «mt caa ©f^. Whether the Arian or Athana- sian interpretation of ^o^t'? 0«ov be adopted, Jesus Christ did display great humility in becoming a man. But the Arians find it difiicult to reconcile their system with the second clause of the 6th verse. They cannot adopt our translation, « thought it not robbery to be equal with God," because that clearly implies that he was once equal with God, and that he considered this equality as his right, which he was not under any obligation to resign. They translate the clause, there- fore, thus, " He did not look upon the being honoured equally with God, as a prize to be snatched, eagerly laid hold of. He did not covet it." Dr. Clarke has defended this translation with the ability of a scholar ; and, in my opinion, as far as a^Hc^nov ijytjcato is concerned, with success. For whether we consider these two words in them- selves, or compare the few places of other authors where they occur, it appears more natural to render them, " thought a prey of which he Avas eager or tenacious," than " thought it a robbery." But if you read the perspicuous able commentary which Bishop Sherlock has given in the first three parts of his discourse on this text, at the beginning of the fourth volume of his discourses, vou will perceive UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 343 that, althougli the Arians are deUvered from that direct contradiction to their system which the translation in our Bible bears, yet even their own translation does not give any essential support to their system. For to jhw wa esa> refers to the same thing with ^o^t*? ®^ov, and, being set in opposition to the appearance of a creature which Christ assumed, implies an essential equality with God. But if he had no right to this equality, it is a strange instance of humility in Christ, that he had not the presumption to lay hold of it. Whereas if he had a right, his not eagerly retaining it, but laying aside the appearance of it, was the greatest humility. So that the apostle's argument turns upon the right of Christ to be like God ; and the only difference created by the two translations is this — according to our translation, the last clause of the 6th verse is a continuation of the description of the prior state of Christ : according to Dr. Clarke's, it is the beginning of the description of his humiliation. You will per- ceive the course of the apostle's argument in the following paraphrase : "Jesus Christ, who, before he appeared upon earth, was in the form of God, i. e. possessed all the glories of the divine nature, was not tenacious of this equality with God, did not consider it as a thing to be eagerly grasped, but emptied himself. He could not cease to be God, but he divested himselfof those glories which constitute the form of God, having taken the form of a servant. Had he appeared as an angel, this would have been taking, in respect of God, the form of a servant; and therefore it is added as the specific description of that form of a servant which he took, having become in the likeness of men •, and although he retained the nature of God, yet, as to outward appearance or fashion, being found by those who sought to take away his life, such as man is, he humbled himself so far, that, when he had power to retain his life, he surrendered it, and submitted to an igno- minious death." By this natural interpretation, the succession of propositions con- tained in this passage teaches us that the same person who was God became man ; and since he who was once God must be always God, the nature of God being unchangeable, it follows that he was at the same time both God and man. The same thing is intimated less clearly, but with a little attention it will appear, not less exclusively, in the third passage, Heb. ii. 14, 16. The apostle is giving a reason why the Captain of Salvation took part of flesh and blood. The reason is, that he might have it in his power to die, because his death was to be the instrument of our deliverance from death. But as nobody thinks of giving a reason why a man should, be a man, the apostle's giving a reason why Christ took part of flesh and blood, implies that this was not the necessary condition of his being, but that it was a matter of choice ; and there- fore it follows not only that he existed before he made the choice, but that he had it in his power to make a difterent choice, i. e. that he existed in a state which admitted of his choosing a more splendid appearance, had he so inclined. That this state was superior to the condition of angels, is made plain by the 16th verse, the most literal and proper rendering of which is, " For truly he lays not hold of angels, but he lays hold of the seed of Abraham," oOiv, upon account of his making which choice, it was necessary that he should in all 344 UNION OP NATURES IN CHRIST. things be made like his brethren. Now whether " laying hold of angels" implies, as the Socinians are fond of interpreting the phrase, " helping angels," because they do not suppose that Christ had it in his power to be like an angel ; or whether it means, according to our translation, laying hold of them, so as to assume their nature and form, the phrase is very improper, unless the Being to whom it is ap- plied was so far superior to angels, that he had it in his power to pass by them or not, to lay hold of them or not, as he pleased. And this Being, who, in his antecedent state of existence was superior to an- gels, it is here said, took part of flesh and blood, which are the cha- racteristics of men ; and because he was thus made in all things like them, they are called his brethren. The review of these three passages suggests the whole of the argu- ment upon this subject, which may be thus stated in a few words. The names, the characters, the actions, and the honours of God are ascribed to Jesus Christ : the affections, the infirmities, and the suffer- ings of man are also ascribed to Jesus Christ ; therefore in him the divine and human natures were united, or the same Person is both God and man. It would seem that this inference should be admitted by all those who pay a due regard to the plain declarations of Scripture ; and, had Christians rested in this inference, there could not have been much variety of opinion upon the subject. But when men began to speculate concerning the manner of that union which the Scriptures teach us to believe, they soon went far beyond the measure of infor- mation which the Scriptures afford. They multiplied words without having clear ideas ; their meaning being, in this way, never perfectly apprehended by themselves was readily misunderstood by others ; and the controversies upon this point, which, at the beginning, involved a fundamental article of the Christian faith, degenerated at last into a verbal dispute, conducted with mnch acrimony, in the mere jargon of metaphysics. Those sects who considered Jesus as merely a man, whatever was the date of their existence, or whatever were the numbers that em- braced their tenets, escaped by the simplicity of their system from this controversy. But the great body of Christians, who learned from Scripture that Jesus Christ was more than man, differed widely in their speculations as to the manner of reconciling the opposite descrip- tions of his Person ; and, in the early ages of Christianity, the dis- pute was of much importance, because it turned upon the reality of the two natures, or the permanency of their union. In the history of this controversy our attention is first engaged by the opinion of the Gnostics. All the Gnostics agreed in considering the Christ as an emanation from the Supreme Mind, an iEon of the highest order sent from the Pleroma, i. e. the space inhabited by those spirits who had emanated from the Supreme Mind, to deliver the hu- man race. But as the fundamental principle of their system was the inherent and incorrigible depravity of matter, all of them agreed also in thinking it impossible that so exalted a spirit was truly and perma- nently united to a gross material substance. Some of them, there- fore, supposed that Jesus, although made in the likeness of men, was not really a man ; that the body which the Jews saw was either a UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 345 phantasm that played upon their senses, or, if it had a real existence, was a spiritual substance, not formed of the same corruptible mate- rials as our bodies, standing in no need of those supplies which it seemed to receive, and incapable of those sufferings which it seemed to endure. Those Gnostics, who considered Jesus as a man only in appearance, are known by the name ^oxr^tai. Other Gnostics, who found it difficult to reconcile the mere phantasm of a body with the history of Jesus Christ, followed the more substantial system of Ce- rinthus, who held that Jesus of Nazareth was a man born like other men, and not distinguished from his countrymen, till he was thirty years of age, in any other way than by the innocence of his life ; that when he came to John to be baptized, that exalted ^on called the Cln'ist, descended upon him in the form of a dove, or in the man- ner in which a dove descends, and continued to inhabit his body during the period of his ministry ; that the person called Jesus Christ was a man, all whose actions were directed by the ^Eon who dwelt within him, but that when he was delivered into the hands of the Jews, the Christ returned to the Pleroma, and Jesus was left to suffer and to die. It is a tradition derived from the earliest Christian writers, that the Apostle John lived to witness both these branches of the Gnostic heresy, and that he wrote his gospel and his epistles on purpose to correct their errors ; and this tradition is very much confirmed by our observing that by means of the continual reference which his writings bear to the tenets that were then spreading among Christians, we are able to derive from them the clearest proofs both of the divinity and of the humanity of our Saviour. Thus, in his gospel, as he begins with declaring "the word was God," so he says at the 14th verse, " the word was made flesh :" and in his 1st Epistle, v. 20, as he says of Jesus Christ, " This is the true God," so he bears his testimony both against the Cerinthians, who separated Jesus from Christ, (ii. 22,) and against the Docetse, who said that Jesus Christ was not truly a man. (iv. 2, 3.) The phrase used in the last of these passages, " Jesus Christ is come in the flesh," furnishes an argument which Dr. Horsley has urged with his wonted acuteness against the modern Unitarians. The argument is this : Unless the words " in the flesh" are mere ex- pletives, they limit the words " is come" to some particular manner of coming. This limitation either is nugatory, or it presumes a pos- sibility of other ways of coming. But it was not possible for a mere man to come otherwise than in the flesh ; therefore Jesus Christ is more than man. And thus in this proposition, " Jesus Christ is come in the flesh," the denial of which John makes a mark of Antichrist, there is an allusion both to the divinity and to the incarnation of our Saviour. While the general principles of the Gnostics led them to deny the reality of Christ's body, it is the character of that system which is known by the name of the Apollinarian, to ascribe to our Saviour a true body, but not a luiman soul. We have reason to believe that the ancient Arians, who held Christ to be the most exalted spirit that had proceeded from God, considered this spirit as performing the functions of a human soul in the body which it assumed, so that, as in all mere men, there is the union of a body with a human soul, there was in the person of Jesus Christ the union of a body with an angelical 3 A 346 UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. spirit. Apollinaris did not hold the distinguishing tenet of Alius. He was the friend of Athanasius, himself an able and zealous assertor of the divinity of Christ. But he conceived that the most natiu'al way of explaining the incarnation of t?ie Son of God was to consider the Godhead as supplying the place of a soul, and the body which the Godhead animated, as in all respects like the bodies of other men ; and as this system appeared to degrade the Godhead, by subjecting it to all the sensations of a human soul, Apollinaris endeavoured to obviate the objection arising from this degradation, by recurring to a distinction well known in the ancient Greek philosophy ; a distinction between ■^vx^i, the sensitive soul which man has in common with the other animals, and vov?, the rational soul by which he is raised above them. Apollinaris held that Christ assumed, together with the body, the -^vxt], or principle of animal life ; but that he did not assume the vovi, the principle of thought and reason, because all the offices which belong to this higher power were in him performed by the Godhead. The modern Arians, who, in the last century, have revived the ancient tenet, that Christ the Word is an exalted angel, incline to adopt the Apollinarian system. It appears to them superfluous to place the spirit of an angel and the spirit of a man in the same body ; and they say, that the easiest explication of this phrase, " the Word was made flesh," that which preserves the most proper unity of person, and renders Jesus Christ, strictly speaking, one intelligent agent, is this, that the spirit of the angel, who is called the Word, inhabited and animated a human body. The modern Arians defend this Apollina- rian system by the following arguments. As the body is the only part of human nature which we perceive, and as we are entirely ignorant of the manner of the union between body and mind, the name man is properly applied to every being which possesses a human body, performing its functions under the guidance of a spirit, whatever the origin or rank of that spirit be : and accordingly those inhabitants of heaven who appeared frequently under the Old Testament, and the angels who appeared at the resurrection of Jesus, are called men, because they had the appearance of men, although it was never sup-' posed that they had a human soul. The Scriptures speak of Christ's coming in the flesh, of his being made flesh, of his taking part of flesh and blood : they never speak of his taking a soul ; and all the phrases in which the soul and spirit of Christ are mentioned, do not denote different parts of the same person, but are Hebrew idioms which mean nothing more than Christ himself. The answers to these arguments of the modern Arians which readily occur are the following : that Jesus Christ was not truly a man, unless he assumed that kind of spirit which is characteristical of the human species ; that man is what he is, by his mind more than by his body ; and that if our Lord stooped to the external form, it is not likely that he would disdain to connect himself with the spiritual inhabitant ; that there is no analogy between the transient appearances of angels recorded in Scripture, and the permanent complete humanity manifested in the words, the actions, and the sufferings of him who " dwelt among" men ; and that the expressions of Scripture referring to the soul of Christ are so many, and repeated in such a variety of forms, that a great part of the history of Jesus is enigmatical and illu- UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 347 sory, unless he was truly a man in respect of his soul as well as in respect of his body. Such are tlie arguments which our liabits and modes of thinking suggest, and which the Athanasians and Socinians of our days con- spire in opposing to the ApoUinarian system. But there is another argument whicli was considered in ancient times as a more eifectual refutation of the ApoUinarian system than any that I have mentioned. It was universally believed in the first ages of tlie Christian church, that there is a place for departed spirits, where the souls of the righteous rest in joy and hope, although they are not put in possession of the complete happiness of heaven, until they are re-united to their bodies at the last day. This place was called Hades, hell, a word which, in ecclesiastical writers, denoted originally not a state of pun- ishment, but merely the habitation of departed spirits, as the grave is the receptacle of the body. Of this place David was supposed to speak in Psalm xvi. " For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell ; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption ;" and, as the Apostle Peter expressly applies these words to Jesus, Acts ii. 31, when he says, " David, seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption," it was believed on this authority, that when the body of Christ was committed to the grave, his soul went to the place of departed spirits, and remained there till his resurrection. But if the soul of Christ went to the place of departed spirits, it follows that he had a complete human soul, and was in this respect, as well as in respect of his body, made like his brethren. For the ^^xn, the sensitive soul of animals, does not enter that place : the Godhead cannot be supposed to have been confined there ; and therefore it could be nothing but the wuj, the reasoning soul, which the ApoUinarian system denied to Christ, that waited, in the same place with other souls, the resurrection of his body. When the council of Constantinople, in tbe end of the fourth cen- tury, the second of those which are called general councils, condemned the opinion of Apollinaris, they declared that they considered Christ as being ova a.\vxov, ovti wow, and that they did not hold o-tiXri trjv tri^ sa^xoi oixovo^iav, i. e. that they believed him to be truly and completely a man. The church did not long rest in this acknowledgment of that truth which the Scriptures seem to teach upon this subject, but soon began to speculate concerning the manner in which this com- plete human nature is united with the Godhead, and from their specu- lations upon this incomprehensible point there arose different sects, whose peculiar tenets are still retained in some parts of the Christian church. It is the business of ecclesiastical history to trace the origin and the progress of these sects. I shall content myself with marking their distinguishing opinions, and, instead of attempting to follow them through the labyrinth of metaphysics, in which they contended with one another, I shall barely suggest the general views upon which the different opinions proceeded. Nestorius, who had been taught to distinguish accurately between the divine and human nature of Christ, was offended with some ex- pressions commonly used by Christians in the beginning of the fifth century, which seemed to destroy that distinction, and particularly 348 UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. with their calling the virgin Mary ^foroxo?, as if it were possible for the Godhead to be born. His zeal provoked opposition ; in the eager- ness of controversy he was led to use unguarded expressions ; and he was condemned by the third of the general councils, the council of Ephesus, in the year 431. It is a matter of doubt whether the opinions of Nestorius, if he had been allowed by his adversaries fairly to explain them, would have appeared inconsistent with the doctrine established by the council of Ephesus, that Christ is one person, in whom two natures were most closely united. But whatever was the extent of the error of Nestorius, from him is derived that system con- cerning the incarnation of Christ, which is held by a large body of Christians in Chaldea, Assyria, and other regions of the east, and which is known in the ecclesiastical history of the west by the name of the Nestorian heresy. The object of the Nestorians is to avoid every appearance of ascribing to the divinity of Christ the weakness of humanity ; and therefore they distinguish between Christ, and God who dwelt in Christ as in a temple. They say, that from the moment of the virgin's conception, there commenced an intimate and indis- soluble union between Christ and God, that these two persons pre- sented in Jesus Christ one rf^octuTtoi/, or aspect, but that the union be- tween them is merely an union of will and affection, such in kind as that which subsists between two friends, although much closer in degree. Opposite to the Nestorian opinion is the Eutychian, which derives its name from Eutyches, an abbot of Constantinople, who, about tlie middle of the fifth century, in his zeal to avoid the errors of Nestorius, was carried to the other extreme. Those who did not hold the Nestorian opinions had been accustomed to speak of the " one in- carnate nature" of Christ. But Eutyches used this phrase in such a manner as to appear to teach that the human nature of Christ was absorbed in the divine, and that his body had no real existence. This opinion was condemned in the year 451, by the council of Chalcedon, the fourth general council, which declared, as the faith of the catholic church, that Christ is one person ; that in this unit}?- of person there are two natures, the divine and the human; and that there is no change, or mixture, or confusion of these two natures, but that each retains its distinguishing properties. The decree of Chalcedon was not universally submitted to. But many of the successors of Euty- ches, wishing to avoid the palpable absurdity which was ascribed to him, of supposing that one nature was absorbed by another, and anxious at the same time to preserve that unity which the Nestorians divided, declared their faith to be, that in Christ there is one nature, but that this nature is twofold or compounded. From this tenet, the meaning of which I do not pretend to explain, the successors of Eutyches derive the name of Monophysites ; and from Jacob Baradseus, who in the following century was a zealous and successful preacher of the system of the Monophysites, they are more commonly known by the name of Jacobites. The Monophj^- sites or Jacobites are found chiefly near the Euphrates and Tigris ; they are much less numerous than the Nestorians ; and although the/ profess to have corrected the errors which were supposed to adhere UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 349 to the Eutychiaii heresy, they may be considered as having formed their pecuUar opinions upon the general principles of that system. Tlie MonotheUtes, an ancient sect, of whom a remnant is found in the neighbourhood of Mount Libanus, disclaim any connexion with Eutyches, and agree with the Catholics in ascribing two natures to Christ ; but they iiave received their name from their conceiving that Christ, being one Person, can have only one will : whereas the Catholics, considering both natures as complete, think it essential to each to have a will, and say that every inconvenience which can be supposed to arise from two wills in one person, is removed by the perfect harmony between that will which belongs to the divine, and that which belongs to the human nature of Christ. Only one circumstance remains to be stated, in order to complete the view of the doctrine of the church, concerning the incarnation of the Son of God. It is what is called the miraculous conception of our Saviour ; by which is meant that the human nature of Christ was formed, not in the ordinary method of generation, but out of the sub- stance of the Virgin Mary, by the immediate operation of the Holy Ghost. The evidence upon which this article of the Christian faith rests, is found in Matt. i. 18 — 23, and in the more particular narration which Luke has given in the first chapter of his gospel. If we admit this evidence of the fact, we can discern the emphatical meaning of the appellation given to the Saviour, when he is called the seed of the woman. Gen. iii. 15 ; we can perceive the meaning of a phrase which Luke has introduced into the genealogy of Jesus, Luke iii. 23, and of which otherwise it is not possible to give a good account ; w, wj evoixi^sro, Dtoj Iw5)7(|) ; and we can discover a peculiar significancy in an expression of the Apostle Paul, Gal. iv. 4, " God sent forth his Son, made of a woman." Some sects of early Christians, whose principles did not allow them to admit the miraculous conception, got rid of this article of the Chris- tian faith by rejecting the first two chapters of Matthew's gospel, the only gospel which they received ; and Dr. Priestley has spent half a volume in attempting to show that this doctrine may be false, although it is delivered by two Evangelists. Upon those who believe the authenticity and inspiration of Scripture, his argument will make no impression, and as these are the two fundamental principles upon which my course proceeds, I will not, at this stage of our progress, spend any time in combating the reasons which Dr. Priestley pre- sumes to oppose to the authority of Scripture. The miraculous con- ception, the last article, as Mr. Gibbon says, which Dr. Priestley has struck out of his scanty creed, has been the uniform faith of the Christian church : it is the foundation of several questions concerning ISIary, more curious than useful, which have been eagerly discussed ; and it is implied in those honours which, from the beginning, have been paid to her, and which, in the church of Rome, have degene- rated into idolatry. The conception of Jesus is the point from which we date the union between his divine and human nature ; and, this conception being miraculous, the existence of the Person in whom they are united was not physically derived from Adam. But, as Dr. Horsley speaks in his sermon on the incarnation, union 33 350 UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. with the uncreated Word is the very principle of personahty nnd individual existence in the Son of Mary. According to this view of the matter, the miraculous conception gives a completeness and consistency to the revelation concerning Jesus Christ. Not only is he the Son of God, hut, as the Son of man, he is exalted above his brethren, while he is made like them. He is preserved from the contamination adhering to the race whose nature he assumed ; and when the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, was made flesh, the intercourse which, as man, he had with God is distinguished, not in degree only, but in kind, from that which any prophet ever enjoyed, and is infinitely more intimate, because it did not consist in communications occasionally made to him, but arose from the manner in which his human nature had its existence. After the fact is admitted, that the divine and human natures were united in Jesus Christ, all speculations concerning the manner of the fact are vague and unsatisfying ; all disputes upon this point instantly degenerate into a mere verbal controversy, in which the terms of human science are applied to a subject which is infinitely exalted above them, and words are multiplied very far beyond the number and clearness of the ideas entertained by those who use them. There are no disputes, even in scholastic theology, which are more frivolous, and none which, in the present state of science, appear more uninteresting, than those that respect the doctrine of the in- carnation ; and there is a danger that you may from thence conceive a prejudice against the importance of the doctrine itself. I mean, therefore, to lay aside all consideration of the different opinions, and to take hold of that simple proposition which the Scriptures declare, that I may show you the rank which it holds in the scheme of Chris- tianity— the consequences which flow from it — and the influence which it sheds over other articles of our faith. We have learned from Scripture that Jesus Christ is truly God : we have learned from Scripture that he is truly man ; and therefore it is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture that he is both God and man. This union of the nature of God and the nature of man in his person, is called by divines the Hypostatical or Personal Union, of which it is impossible for us to form an adequate conception, and upon which the mind soon wanders when it begins to speculate ; but which, with those who rest in the declarations of Scripture, is under- stood to mean, that the same person is both God and man. Since Jesus Christ is both God and man, it follows that each nature in him is complete, and that the two are distinct from one another. If the divine nature were incomplete, he would not be God ; if the human nature were incomplete, he would not be man ; and if the two natures were confounded, he would neither be truly God, nor truly man, but something arising out of the composition. In this respect the union of the soul and body of a man is a very inadequate representation of the hypostatical luiion. Neither the soul nor the body is by itself complete. The soul without the body has no instrument of its operations : the body without the soul 'S destitute of the principle of life ; the two are only different parts of one complex nature. But Jesus Christ was God before he became UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 351 man, and there was nothing deficient in his humanity ; so that the hypostatical union was the union of two distinct natures, each of which is entire. The hypostatical union, thus understood, is the key which opens to us a great part of the phraseology of Scripture concerning Jesus Christ. He is sometimes spoken of as God ; He is sometimes spoken of as man ; and things peculiar to each nature are alhrmed concerning him, not as if he possessed one nature to the exchision of the other, but because, possessing both, the characters of each may with equal propriety be ascribed to him. This is known in the Greek theological writers by the name of avtiSoai? tSitOjuatw, which the Latins have translated comniiaiicatio proprietatum, the communi- cation of the properties. You will not understand them to mean by this phrase, that any thing peculiar to the divine nature was com- municated to the human, or vice versa ; for it is impossible that the Deity can share in the weakness of humanity, and it is impossible that humanity could be exalted to a participation of any of the essen- tial perfections of the God-head. Although, therefore, the Word fills heaven and earth, because by him all things consist, yet as it is of the very nature of body to occupy a certain portion of space, the body of Christ, without losing that nature from which it derives its name, cannot, by union with the Word, become omnipresent, but during our Lord's ministry was upon earth, forty days after his resurrection ascended, /. e. was transferred by a local motion from earth to heaven, and is now in heaven. I have chosen this example, because the Lutheran church, in attempting to explain the words used by our Lord in the institution of the Lord's supper, " This is my body," have conceived that ubiquity is derived to the body of Christ from its connexion with the J^jyoj. This error our church justly condemns, li^ach nature we conceive to retain its own properties, and there is said to be a communication of properties for this reason, because the properties of both natures are ascribed to the same person, in so much, that even when Jesus Christ derives his name from his divine nature, as when he is called the Son of God, things peculiar to the human nature are affirmed of him. " Christ, in the work of mediation, acteth according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself. Yet, by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture attributed to the person denominated by the other nature."* Thus, when we read of the " church of God which he hath pur- chased with his own blood" — " that God laid down his life for us" — "that the Lord of glory was crucified," — we do not, from such ex- pressions, infer that God could suffer : but, taking the passages from which we had inferred the union of two natures in Christ as a guide, we consider these expressions as only transferring, in consequence of the closeness of that union, to him who is called God, because he is God, the actions and passions which belong to him because he is man. In like manner, when we read that all things were made by the Word, we do not suppose that they were made by the Word after * Confession of Faith, viii. 7. 352 UNION OP NATURES IN CHRIST. he became flesh ; and when our Lord says, " the Son of man liath power to forgive sins," we recollect that the Person who claims this high and incommunicable prerogative of the Deity is the Word who " in the beginning was with God, and was God ;" and the truth of the proposition does not appear to us to be in the least impaired by his condescending to remind us, at the very time when he claims this prerogative, that he is also the Son of man. This mode of speaking, so frequent in Scripture, by which the pro- perties of both God and man are applied to Jesus Christ, the properties of God even when he is called man, and the properties of man even when he is called God, has given occasion to one distinction which is used by the ancient theological writers, and to another which is used by the modern. Neither distinction is expressed in the words of Scripture : but both are warranted by the authority of Scripture ; and both are employed for the same purpose, to explain several passages concerning Jesus Christ, which, without attending to such distinctions, appear to contradict the analogy of faith. The ancient distinction is thus explained by Bishop Bull,* whose words I shall nearly translate. " The whole doctrine concerning Christ was divided by the ancient doctors of the church into two parts, which they called ^foxoyia and oixopofiia. By ^so7.oyca they meant every thing that related to the divinity of our Saviour ; his being the Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, and the world's being made by him. By owoi'0;uta they meant his incarnation, and every thing that he did in the flesh to pro- cure the salvation of mankind. Our God Jesus Christ, says Ignatius, was born by Mary xat^ oixowfitav @iov. Christians, says Justin, acknow- ledge Christ the Son of God, who was before the morning star, and condescended to be made flesh Iva 6ta tr^ otxovoficai tavtrji the serpent might be destroyed. We believe, says Irenaeus, in the Son of God, Jesus Christ our Lord, by whom are all things, xau hj -ta; oixovofiiai avtov, by which the Son of God became man. These three primitive writers, all of whom lived before the middle of the second century, led the way to their successors in the use of the word oixow/xia ; and the ancient way of explaining those passages which seemed to be inconsistent with the divinity of our Saviour, was to refer them to the oixovofiia. The same thing is meant by the modern distinction, according to which some things are said to be spoken of our Saviour in his human nature, and others in his divine. It is allowed that the words divine and human nature of Christ are not found in Scripture. But it can- not be denied that he is there spoken of sometimes as God and some- times as man, and that some propositions which would appear to be false, if he were only God, and others which would appear to be false, if he were only a man, are affirmed concerning him who is both God and man. We conceive, therefore, that the Scriptures, although they do not use the words, aftbrd us a sufficient warrant for the modern distinction : and we learn from numberless instances in which the dis- tinction is clearly implied, to exercise our judgment in interpreting those passages which have some degree of obscurity, according to either the divine or the human nature of Christ, as may best preserve the analogy of faith. * Judicium Ecc. Cath. cap. v. p. 45. UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 353 I shall give you a specimen of this use of the ancient and modern distinctions, by applying them to the explication of passages respecting the three following subjects, the humiliation of Jesus, his exaltation, and the termination of that khigdom which is said to have been given him. 1. The ancient and modern distinction suggested by the doctrine of Scripture concerning the incarnation of Christ, is of use to explain the descriptions that are given of his humiliation. It is said that " Christ came down from heaven ;" that he who " was rich became poor ;" that " he was made a little lower than the angels ;" that (xsvuxscv tavtov, wliicli wc rcudcr " made himself of no reputation," but which properly means, emptied himself of that which he had. Now it has been asked with triumph by those who deny the original dig- nity of our Saviour's person, how a God could leave heaven ; how it is consistent with the character of the Creator and Ruler of the universe to desert his station, and confine himself for thirty years within a human body ; and how his place was supplied during this temporary relinquishment of the care of all things ? The answer to these ques- tions is derived from the distinction of which we are speaking, i. e. the expressions now quoted are to be referred to the oixovo^iia. They do not imply any change upon the divine nature of Christ, which by being divine is incapable of change ; they do not mean that the powers of the Godhead were impaired or suspended, but only that the exercise of them was concealed from the eyes of mortals, and that the form of God, which Jesus had before the worlds were made, was veiled by the humanity which he assumed. For, as Eusebius speaks, (see Bull, 275,) "he was not so entangled with the chains of flesh as to be confined to that place where his body was, and restrained from being in any other ; but at the very time when he dwelt with men, he filled all things, he was with the Father, and he took care of all things which are in heaven and which are in earth." And all this is but a commentary upon these words of our Lord, John iii. 1 3, " And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven ;" who is in heaven at the very time when the body with which he has united himself is upon earth. The same distinction suggests the proper interpretation of those phrases in which our Lord speaks of himself according to the language of the prophet Isaiah, as the servant of God. " As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. As my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. I came not to do mine own will, but the will of him who sent me."* The Apostle to the Hebrews, v. 7, 8, speaks still more strongly. Now if we knew nothing more of Jesus than these passages contain, we could not hesi- tate to admit all that inferiority to the Supreme Being which the Arians or even the Socinians teach. But if we recollect that the attributes and names of God are elsewhere applied to him, then according to the rules of sound criticism, which teach us to adopt that interpretation by which an author is made consistent with him- self, we must refer the passages containing that strong language to the otxoz'o,taa, and consider them as spoken of the man Jesus Christ, * John xiv. 31 ; viii. 28 ; vi. 38. 32* 3B 354 UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. who at his incarnation became the minister of his Father's will, who, as man, prayed and gave thanks to his God, and whose human nature admitted of learning, and suffering, and strong crying, and fear. In the same manner we are accustomed to explain that remarkable expression of our Lord, Mark xiii. 32 : " Of that day knoweth no man, no, not the angels, neither the Son, but the Father." The Son of God cannot be ignorant of the day of judgment. For we read, that in him " are hid all the treasures of wisdom and know^ledge ;" that " the Father showeth the Son all things that himself doth ;" that "no man knoweth the Father, save the Son."* We are obliged, therefore, to have recourse to the distinction between the divine and human nature of Christ : and as the expression, Luke ii. 52, " Jesus increased in wisdom and stature," unquestionably means that the human soul which animated his body improved as his body grew, although the ^oyoi united to the soul knew all things from the begin- ning, so here the Son, considered as the Son of man, by which name our Lord had spoken of himself at the 26th verse, is said to be igno- rant of that which the Son of God certainly knew. 2. We avail ourselves of the same distinction to explain what is said in Scripture concerning the exaltation of Jesus. You read in numberless places of a dominion being given to Jesus, of his receiv- ing power from the Father, of his overcoming and entering into his glory. You find the connection between his sufferings and his ex- altation stated explicitly, Hcb. ii. 9, and Phil. ii. 8, 9, 10; and the words of our Lord, John v. 26, 27, appear to be to the same pur- pose. The inference obviously drawn from such passages is this, that Jesus Christ received from God the Father a recompense for his obe- dience and sufferings in procuring our salvation ; that this recompense was not only the highest honour and felicity conferred on himself, but also a sovereignty over those whom he had redeemed ; and that thus by his recompense there is derived to him from God a right to the worship and service of the human race. It is so agreeable to our natural sense of justice, that eminent virtue should be crowned with an illustrious reward ; it is so flattering to our ideas of the dignity of human nature, to behold a man raised by the excellence of his character to the government of the universe, that this inference constitutes by much the most pleasing part of the Socinian system : and as it may be stated in such a manner as to be perfectly consistent with that doctrine which you profess to teach, you will find that you cannot introduce into your sermons a more popular topic of exhortation, and of encouragement to persevering exertion in the discharge of our duty. But pleasing and useful as this view of the exaltation of Jesus is, it plainly does not contain the whole account of the matter, for the following reasons: — 1. Some of the very passages which speak of a recompense being given to Jesus had declared, a little before, the ori- ginal dignity of his person. He had been styled in the Epistle to the Hebrews, " the brightness of the Father's glory ;" in the Epistle to the Philippians, " he who was in the form of God ;" and he had said * Col. ii. 3. John V. 20. Matt, xi. 27. UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. 355 of himself, John v. 1 9, " What things soever the Father doth, these also doth the Son likewise." 2. Many passages of Scripture, by de- claring that Jesus Christ created all things, teach us that before he obeyed or suffered in the flesh, he possessed a clear title to universal dominion. And, 3. This original dignity of person, and this most ancient title to dominion, are of such a kind that it was impossible for them to receive any accession. He who is the image of the invisible God could not by any new state be rendered more glorious or more happy; and no gift or subsequent appointment could constitute a more perfect right, or a more complete subjection of all things to Jesus Christ, than that which arose from his being the Word by whom all things were made, and by whom they consist. For these reasons it is manifest that if we consider Christ only as the Son of God, his exaltation can mean nothing more than that his original title to dominion was published by the preaching of the gos- pel, and universally recognized, and that to this original title there was superadded the new title of Redeemer of the world. But this is not a full explication of all the places in which his exaltation is spoken of; for the passages quoted from the Hebrews, the Philip- pians, and from John, lead us to attend, in the very appointment of this dominion, to the incarnation of the Son of God. The dominion is said to be given him because he is the Son of Man — for the suffer- ing of death — because he humbled himself; and we are thus obliged, in explaining that dominion, to have recourse to the ancient and mo- dern distinction which we are now applying. It is part of the owovo^ia, which the Scriptures teach, that, as the Son of God, when he was made flesh, veiled his glory, so after his resurrection, the flesh which he had assumed was exalted to partake of that glory. All that from the beginning had appertained to the Son of God, is now declared to belong to that person who is both God and man : and he is invested with the office of Ruler and Judge, in the execution of which he completes that work which he began, when he was made flesh. It is not, therefore, in respect of the divine nature of Christ, which does not admit of a recompense, but in respect of his human nature, that his exaltation is stated under the notion of a reward : the scandal attending his humiliation is thereby completely removed : and the declaration of his appointment to the sovereignty of the universe is the provision which God hath made, that, notwithstanding his humi- liation, " all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father." 3. By the same distinction we are enabled to account for what is said in Scripture concerning the termination of the dominion given to Christ. The words of the Apostle Paul upon this subject, 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25, 28, cannot mean that the dominion of Christ, which is founded on his having created all things, shall come to an end ; for this must continue as long as any creature exists; neither can they mean that the gratitude and worship of those whom he redeemed by his blood, and that right to their obedience which arises from his interposition, shall ever cease ; for this is an obligation which must co-exist with the souls of the redeemed. Accordingly, John heard every creature in heaven and in earth saying, " Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb 356 UNION OF NATURES IN CHRIST. for ever and ever :"* and the kingdom of Christ is represented, both in the Old and in the New Testament, as everlasting. The meaning, therefore, of the words of the Apostle must be, that the office with which the Son of Man was invested, in order to carry into full effect the purposes of his incarnation, which divines are accustomed to call his mediatorial kingdom, shall cease when these purposes are accom- plished. His authority to execute judgment must expire, after the quick and the dead have received according to their works : and he can no longer rule in the midst of his enemies, after they are all put under his feet. Every thing which the ancient theological writers meant by oixovofiia will then be concluded : and although the Son of God never can lay aside his relation to those whom by that economy he hath brought to his Father, yet the office implied under the character of Mediator, which had a reference to their preparation for heaven, can have no place amongst the glorified saints, but God shall be all in all, and the Son shall reign in the glory which he had with the Father before the world was. In this manner, from the union between the divine and human natures of Christ, and the communication of the properties of the two natures, we are able to deduce an explication of several passages of Scripture which would otherwise appear unintelligible. There is one other use of the doctrine concerning the incarnation, which is clearly stated in Scripture, and with which I close all that relates particularly to the person of Jesus Christ. It is by the union of the natures in one person that Christ is quali- fied to be the Saviour of the world. He became mari, that with the greatest possible advantage to those whom he was sent to instruct, he might teach them the nature and the will of God ; that his life might be their example ; that by being once compassed with the infirmities of human nature, he might give them assurance of his fel- low-feeling ; that by suffering on the cross he might make atonement for their sins ; and that in his reward they might behold the earnest and the pattern of theirs. But had Jesus been only man, or had he been one of the spirits that surround the throne of God, he could not have accomplished the work which he undertook ; for the whole obedience of every creature being due to the Creator, no part of that obedience can be placed to the account of other creatures, so as to supply the defects of their service, or to rescue them from the punishment which they deserve. The Scriptures, therefore, reveal, that he who appeared upon earth as man is also God, and, as God, was mighty to save ; and by this reve- lation they teach us that the merit of our Lord's obedience, and the efficacy of his interposition, depend upon the hypostatical union.f All modern sects of Christians agree in admitting that the greatest benefits arise to us from the Saviour of the world being man ; but the Arians and Socinians contend earnestly, that his sufferings do not derive any value from his being God ; and their reasoning is specious. *Rev. V. 13. rt^05 txath^ovi oixsio-trj'to; tij ^lUav xac o^tovoiai/ tovi aixfoft^ovi utfayaytiv. Ircn, cont. HffiT. lib. iii. cap. 187. UNION OP NATURES IN CHRIST. 357 You say, they argue, that Jesus Christ who suffered for the sins of men, is botli God and man. You must either say that God suffered, or that he did not suffer; if you say that God suffered, you do indeed affix an infinite value to the sufferings, but you affirm that the God- head is capable of suffering, which is both impious and absurd : if you say that God did not suffer, then, although the person that suffered had both a divine and a human nature, the sufferings were merely those of a man, for, according to your own system, the two natures are distinct, and the divine is impassible. In answer to this method of arguing, we admit that the Godhead cannot suffer, and we do not pretend to explain the kind of support which the human nature derived under its sufferings from the divine, or the manner in which the two were united. But from the uniform language of Scripture, which magnifies the love of God in giving his only begotten Son, which speaks in the highest terms of the precious- ness of the blood of Christ, which represents him as coming in the body that was prepared for him, to do that which sacrifice and burnt- oftering could not do — from all this we infer that there was a value, a merit, in the sufferings of this Person, superior to that which be- longed to the sufferings of any other : and as the same Scriptures intimate in numberless places the strictest union between the divine and human natures of Christ, by applying to him promiscuously the actions which belong to each nature, we hold that it is impossible for us to separate in our imagination this peculiar value which they affix to his sufferings, from the peculiar dignity of his person. The hypostatical union, then, is the corner-stone of our religion. We are too much accustomed, in all our researches, to perceive that things are united, without being able to investigate the bond which unites them, to feel any degree of surprise that we cannot answer all the questions which ingenious men have proposed upon this subject: but we can clearly discern, in those purposes of the incarnation of the Son of God which the Scriptures declare, the reason why they have dwelt so largely upon his divinity ; and if we are careful to take into our view the whole of that description which they give of the person by whom the remedy in the gospel was brought ; if, in our specula- tions concerning him, we neither lose sight of the two parts which are clearly revealed, nor forget, what we cannot comprehend, that union between the two parts which is necessarily implied in the revelation of them, we shall perceive in the character of the Messiah, a com- pleteness, and a suitableness to the design of his coming, which of themselves create a strong presumption that we have rightly inter- preted the Scriptures. 358 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. CHAPTER IX. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. I HAVE now given a view of the different opinions that have been held concerning that person, by whom the remedy offered in the gos- pel was brought to the world. But there is also revealed to us another person by whom that remedy is applied, who is known in Scripture by the name of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost ; and whom our Lord, in different places of that long discourse which John has recorded in chaps, xiv. xv. and xvi. of his gospel, calls Tta^axXf^toi. When you read John xv. 26, you cannot avoid consider- ing o Tia^axxtjtoi as the samc with fo nvsv^a, and as a person distinct from the Father and the Son. iia^axxj^foj is derived from jra^axa'Kiu, the pre- cise meaning of which is, " standing by the side of a person 1 call upon him to do something," and which is commonly translated, " I comfort or encourage." Hence the word T^a^axxrtoi is rendered in our Bibles the Comforter ; but if you attend to the analogy of the Greek language, you will perceive that the manner in which it is formed from the verb, suggests as the more literal interpretation of the noun advocatus, advocate, " one who, being called in, stands by the side of others to assist them." Of the offices of this person I shall have to speak, when I proceed in the progress of my plan to the application of the remedy. At pre- sent I have only to state the information which the Scriptures afford, and the different opinions to which that information has given rise, concerning the character of this person. The subject lies within a much narrower compass than that which I have just finished. Dr. Clarke has collected, in his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, all the passages of the New Testament in which the Spirit is men- tioned. They are very numerous ; they have been differently inter- preted ; and corresponding to this difference of interpretation is the variety of opinions which have been held concerning this person. The simplest method in which I can state the progress of these opinions, is to begin with directing your attention to the form of bap- tism taught by our Lord, Matt, xxviii. 19. Baptism, or washing, is found in the religious ceremonies of all nations. Among the heathen, the initiated after having been instructed in certain hidden doctrines and awful rites were baptized into these mysteries. The Israelites are said by the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. x, 2, to have been baptized into Moses, at the time when they followed him as the servant of God, sent to lead them through the Red Sea. Proselytes to the law of Moses from other nations were received by OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. 359 baptism ; and all the people who went out to hear John, the forerun- ner of Jesus, were baptized by him. into the baptism of repentance. In accommodation to this general practice, Jesus, having employed his apostles to baptize those who came to him during his ministry, sent them forth, after his ascension, to make disciples of all nations by baptizing them. But, in order to render baptism a distinguishing rite, by which his followers might be separated from the followers of any other teacher who chose to baptize, he added these words, " into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." The earliest Christian writers inform us that this solemn form of expression was uniformly employed from the beginning of the Chris- tian church. It is true, indeed, that the Apostle Peter said to those who were converted on the day of Pentecost, Acts ii. 3S, " Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ ;" and that, in different places of the book of Acts, it is said that persons were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus : and from hence those, who deny the argument which I am about to draw from the form of baptism, have inferred that, in the days of the apostles, this form was not rigorously observed. But a little attention will satisfy you that the inference does not follow, because there is internal evidence from the New Testament itself, that when the historian says, persons were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, he means they were baptized according to the form prescribed by Jesus. Thus the question put by Paul, Acts xix. 2, 3, shows that he did not suppose it possible for any person who administered Christian baptism to omit the mention of the Holy Ghost; and even after this question, the historian, when he informs us that the disciples were baptized, is not solicitous to repeat the whole form, but says in his usual manner, Acts xix. 5, '•' when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." There is another question put by the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. i. 13, which shows us in what light he viewed the form of baptism. The question implies his considering the form of baptism as so sacred, that the introducing the name of a teacher into it was the same thing as introducing a new master into the kingdom of Christ. There is nothing, then, in the New Testament contrary to the clear information which we derive from the succession of Christian writers, who agree in declaring that the form of baptism originally prescribed by Jesus was from the beginning observed upon every occasion. At a time when Christianity was not the established religion of the state, but was spreading rapidly through the Roman empire, many were daily baptized who had been educated in the knowledge and belief of other religions, and baptism was their initiation into the faith of Christ. In order to prepare them for this solemn act, they received instruction for many days in the principal articles of the Christian faith, particularly in the knowledge of the three Persons into whose name they were to be baptized, and they were required at their baptism to declare that they believed what they had been taught. The practice of connecting instruction with the administration of baptism rests upon apostolical authority ;* and upon this was probably founded the following practice, which we learn from early writers to • Acts viii. 35—38. Rom. x. 10. 1 Pet. iii. 21. 360 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. have been universal. Those who were to be baptized underwent a preparation, during which they were called, in the Greek church, xatrjxovi^ii'oi. ', in the Latin church, competentes. y<.o.irixoviiivoi is derived from xa.trixi^-> a compound of xara and nx^^-i sono, which implies that they were instructed viva voce by catechists, whose business it was to deliver to them in the most familiar manner the rudiments of tlie doctrine of Christ : Competentes, competitors, or candidates, implies that they were seeking together the honour of being initiated into Christianity. When the catechumens or competentes were judged to have attained a sufficient measure of knowledge, they were brought to the baptismal font, and immediately before their baptism two things were required of them. The one was called artofalij tov ^arwa, segregatio a Sat ana ; the other, owt'oIk t^oj X^ioroi', aggregatio ad Christum. By the one they renounced, in a form of words that was prescribed to them, the devil, his works, liis worship, and all his pomp, i. e. they professed their resolution to forsake both vice and idolatry : by the other, they declared their faith in those articles in which they had been instructed. The most ancient method of declaring this faith was taken from the form of baptism. The person to be baptized said, " I believe in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." By these words, he professed that his faith embraced that whole name into which he was to be baptized ; and the creeds, which came to be used in different churches, appear to have been only enlargements of this original declaration, the substance of which was retained in all of them, but was extended or explained by insertions which were meant to oppose errors in doctrine as they sprang up, and which consequently varied in every church according to the nature of the errors that prevailed there, and the light in which these errors were viewed. Every church required its catechumens to repeat its own creed before they were baptized, so that the repeti- tion of the creed was a declaration on the part of the catechumens, that their faith in the name into which they were to be baptized was the same with that of the church from which they were to receive baptism. It appears by this deduction, that faith in the Holy Ghost was a branch of the rudiments of Christianity, derived from that form by which our Lord appointed disciples to be initiated into his religion ; and in this form you will observe that the Holy Ghost is conjoined with the Father and the Son, in such a manner as obviously to imply that he is a person of equal rank with them. When you recollect the exalted conceptions which the gospel gives of the Father, and the full revelation which it has made of the dignity of the Son ; when you recollect that there is authority in the New Testament for worshipping the Son as the Father ; and when you consider further that the persons who professed their faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, did at the very same time renounce the worship of idols, you will acknowledge that there is an unaccountable ambiguity in tiie expression prescribed by our Lord ; nay, that the form used upon his authority has a necessary tendency to lead Christians into the practice of idolatry which they then renounced, unless the Holy Ghost be, with the Father and the Son, an object of worship. This clear inference from the form of baptism was probably confirmed in the OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. 361 earliest ages by its being observed, that, besides all those places of the New Testament which teach us to reverence the Spirit, there is one passage where the Apostle Paul has joined the three persons together in such a manner as seems intended to convey to his readers a con- ception of the equality of their rank."* " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all." Upon these authorities the Christian church, from the very begin- ning, worshipped the Holy Ghost. There is clear evidence of this foct, in a passage from Justin Martyr,t whom we are accustomed to quote as the best voucher of the opinions and the practices of early times. The succession of Christian writers from Justin say the same thing, and the Spirit is conjoined with the Father and the Son in the most ancient doxologies. But it was a principle with the first Christians, ■fov Qiov [j.ovov 8ev rt^oaxweiv. The worship of any creature was in their eyes idolatry ; and therefore their worshipping the Holy Ghost was expressing by their practice the same inference which they draw in their writings from the form of baptism, viz. that the Holy Ghost is a person of the same rank with the Father and the Son. If this uniform testimony of the Christian writers could be supposed to require any support, we might quote a dialogue entitled Philopatris, commonly ascribed to Lucian, and certainly written either by him, or by some contemporary of his, about the middle of the second century. The author means to give a ludicrous representation of the manner in which the catechumens were instructed, and amongst other circum- stances, he introduces the following.^ The scholar asks by whom he should swear, and the christian instructor answers in words which imply that the Christians, in the days of Lucian, were accustomed to swear by all the three Persons mentioned. But as swearing by a Person is one of those honours which are most properly called divine, Lucian infers, from this part of the practice of the Christians, that in their estimation every one of the three Persons was Zsv^xaiQio;; and thus his testimony comes to be a voucher of both the opinions and the practice of the great body of Christians with regard to the Holy Ghost. During the first three centuries, there was not any particular con- troversy upon this subject, except that which was occasioned by the system of the Gnostics. The numerous sects that come under this description, who corrupted the simplicity of the gospel by a mixture of the tenets of oriental philosophy, held both Christ and the Spirit to be jEons, emanations from the Supreme Mind. But as they de- nied the divine original of the books of Moses, they said that the Spirit, which had inspired him and the prophets, was not that exalted iEon whom God sent forth after the ascension of Christ, but an ^on * 2 Cor. xiii. 13. f A'K'k' ixiivov T( (rtaf f^a,) xm tov ria^ av(ov vlov i>Sov'ta, xai, SiSa^avta j;uaj T'avra xat "tov T'coi' a^XcJ^' tTo^£i»uv xav i%o^otovfiivuiv aya^wz' (xyyiXt^v at^a.tov, jiviv^a ti to Tt^o^ritixov OiSofitOa xai. rt^ofrxvvovixev, 'Koyct xai, aXtjOiva, tifwocT'fj. See Bull, Def. 70. + See Bull, Def. F. N. 73, and Jud. 32. 33 3C 362 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. very much inferior, and removed at a great distance from the Su- preme Being. It was, on the other hand, the general beUef of the Christian church, that the same Spirit who was afterwards sent to the apostles had operated in the saints from the beginning ; and the cha- racter uniformly given of the Spirit by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and the other primitive writers, was in siich words as these : to n^o^Yinxov Tivtvfxa — to 8m tuiv rt^o^j^i'toi/ xixr^^v^os T'ay oixopofiias ®sov. In Order, therefore to oppose the errors of the Gnostics, there came to be introduced into the creed of the church of Jerusalem, which Avas honoured through- out the east as the mother of all the churches, in addition to the ori- ginal words, " I believe «? to dyiw TtvsvjAa" the following, "Torta^azj.jjTOf, to -KaXYioav hia. t^v rt^o^yjfuv.'' We kuow that Cyril, who was Bishop of Jerusalem in the fourth century, wrote an exposition of the creed of which these words are a part ; and we learn from his writings, that this creed was explained to the catechumens in the church of Jerusa- lem, and that they were required to repeat it before they received baptism. Here the matter rested till after the time of the Arian controversy. As Arius held the Son to be the most excellent creature of God, by whom all others were created, the Spirit was necessarily ranked by him amongst the productions of the Son : and accordingly the an- cient writers who have left an account of the heresy of Arius, say that he made the Spirit xtia^ia xtianato;, the creature of a creature. But as his attacks were chiefly directed against the divinity of the Son, and as liis opinions concerning the Spirit were only an inference from the leading principles of his system, they did not draw any particular attention in the council of Nice. This first general council, which met A. D. 325, published the creed, which is known by the name of the Nicene creed, in direct opposition to the errors of Arius. Accord- ingly, they are added in this creed to the second article of the ancient creeds, that concerning the Son, several clauses which were meant to declare the dignity of his person, and his consubstantiality with the Father ; but the third article, that concerning the Spirit, is continued in the same simple mode of expression which had been originally suggested by the form of baptism, xm m to nvivfia to ayto^. In the course of the fourth century, Macedonius, who held a par- ticular modification of the Arian system concerning the Son, follow- ing out the principles of that system, openly denied the divinity of the Spirit, and was the founder of a sect, known in those times by the name Uvivfiato/A.axoi. Macedonius is said by some to have denied that the Holy Ghost is a person distinct from the Father, and to have considered what the Scriptures call the Spirit, as only a divine energy diff'used throughout creation. According to others, he held the Spirit to be a creature, the servant of the Most High God. We are not acquainted witli the detail of his opinions. We only know in general that he did not admit, what in his time had been generally received in the Christian church, that the Holy Spirit is a person of the same divine nature with the Father and the Son ; and we have the clearest evidence that the opinion of Macedonius appeared to the church to be an innovation in the ancient faith. For as the first general comi- cil, the council of Nice, had, A. D. 325, condemned the opinions of Arius with regard to the Son, so the second general council, the OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. 363 council of Constantinople, A. D. 381, condemned the opinions of Macedonius with regard to the Spirit. The council of Nice testified their disapprobation of the opinions of Arius, and guarded those who should be received into the Christian church against his errors, by the additions which they made to the second article of the ancient creeds ; and the council of Constantinople, in like manner, entered their tes- timony against the errors of Macedonius by the following change upon that creed which had been used in the church of Jerusalem, and which appears to have been the same in substance with that used throughout the Christian world. The third article of the ancient creed had run thus, ti^ to ayiov Ttvsvixa, to Tta^axXrjtov, to ^.aXrjauv 6ia ti^v rt^o^-^ttov. In- stead of TO na^a.xxrjtov, which might be conceived to convey a notice of inferiority and ministration in the Holy Ghost, the council of Con- stantinople introduced the following expressions : Kai «j t-o Ttvevfia to ayiot', to xv^LOf to (^(^orioww, to ex tov rtar^oj ixrto^evojxevov, to aw 7tat;v xat vicp rteod- xwov/j-svov scat SvvSo^a^ofxevov, to XaT^rjaav Sia tutv 7t^o^t]tu)v. The expressions inserted instead of to rta^axxtjtov, were intended to declare, what the natural import of the words very strongly conveys, that majesty of character in the Holy Ghost, and that equality with the Father and the Son in worship and glory, which those who are admitted to Christian baptism after being catechumens had been taught, in the application of the original form, to believe, and which it does not appear that the great body of the church, till the time of Macedonius, had ever thought of questioning. When, in the sixteenth century, opinions concerning the Son, much bolder than those which had been held by Arius, or any of his fol- lowers, were avowed and published by Socinus, it was not possible that he could acquiesce in the received creed concerning the Spirit : and the opinion which he adopted upon this subject was the same with that refined system which has been ascribed by some to Mace- donius, Socinus did not say that the Holy Ghost is a creature ; he said that it is the power and energy of God sent from heaven to men ; that by its being given without measure, as the Scriptures speak, to Jesus Christ, this great Prophet was sanctified, and led, and raised above all the other messengers of heaven ; that by the extraordinary measure in which it was given to his apostles, they were qualified for executing their commission ; and that it is still communicated in such manner and such degree as is necessary for the comfort and sanctification of the disciples of Jesus. This is the system of the modern Socinians, which Lardner has brought forward in some pieces that are published in the tenth and elevenjth volumes of his works, and which is found often recurring in the writings of Priestly and Lindsey. The arguments upon which this system rests are of the following kind. An attempt is made to reconcile with this system all those passages of Scripture which seem to imply that the Holy Ghost is a distinct person ; it is said that the Spirit of God sometimes denotes the power or wisdom of God, as they are communicated to men, i. e. spiritual gifts; that it is some- times merely a circumlocution for God himself; and that when the Spirit of God appears to be spoken of as a person, we are to under- stand that there is a figure of speech, the same kind of prosopopoeia by which it is said that charity is kind and envieth not — that sin 364 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. deceives and slays us — and that the law speaks. It is allowed that the figure is variously used in different places; but it is alleged, that, by a moderate exercise of critical sagacity, all those passages of the New Testament, in which the Spirit of God is mentioned, may be explained without our being obliged to suppose that a person is deiroted by that expression. This is the Socinian mode of arguing with regard to the Holy Ghost. Upon the other side, it is argued by Bishop Pearson, who has treated the subject very fully and distinctly in his Exposition of the Creed ; by Dr. Barrow, in one of his S&rmons on the Creed ; by Bishop Burnet, on the Thirty-nine Articles, and by others, that num- berless actions and operations which unavoidably convey the idea of a person are ascribed to the Holy Ghost — that there are many places in which neither prosopopoeia nor any other figure of speech can account for this manner of speaking — and that the attributes, and names, and description of this person, are such as clearly imply that he is no creature, but truly God. The subject, it may be seen, from this general account of the argu- ment upon both sides, runs out into a long detail of minute criticism. Without attempting to enter into this, I will only suggest four general observations, which it is proper to carry along with you when you examine those passages which Dr. Clarke has fairly collected in his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, and upon which the other writers argue. 1. In many places of Scripture, "the Spirit of God" may be a cir- cumlocution for God himself, or for the power and wisdom of God. Thus, when we read, " whither shall I go from thy spirit, and whither shall I flee from thy presence ?" — " they vexed his holy spirit" — " by his spirit he hath garnished the heavens ;" or when Jesus says, " If I by the Spirit of God ;" in another gospel it is, " if I by the finger of God cast out devils," it is not more reasonable to infer from these expressions that the Spirit of God is a person distinct from God, than it would be to suppose that, when we speak of the spirit of a man, we mean a person distinct from the man himself You will not think that, because the circumlocution, for which the Socinians contend, does not give the true explication of all the passages to which they wish to apply it, there is no instance of its being used in Scripture : and you will always carry along with you this general rule of scrip- ture criticism, that it is most unbecoming those, who profess to derive all their knowledge of theology from the Scriptures, to strain texts in order to make them appear to support particular doctrines, and that there never can be any danger to truth, in adopting that interpreta- tion of Scripture which is the most natural and rational. 2. There are many passages in which " the Spirit of God" means gifts or powers communicated to men, and from which we are not warranted to infer that there is a person who is the fountain and dis- tributer of these gifts. So we read often in the Old Testament, " the Spirit of the Lord came upon him," when nothing more is necessarily implied under the expression, than that the person spoken of was endowed with an extraordinary degree of skill, or might or wisdom. So the promises of the Old Testament, " I will pour out my Spirit upon you," were fulfilled under the New Testament, by what are OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. 365 there called "the gifts of the Holy Ghost;" in reference to which we read, "that Christians received the Holy Ghost" — "that the Holy Ghost was given to them" — " that they were filled with the Spirit." Neither the words of the promise, nor the words that relate the fulfil- ment of it, suggest the personality of the Spirit; and if we knew nothing more than what such passages suggest, the Socinian system upon tliis subject would exhaust the meaning of Scripture, and the Spirit would appear to be merely a virtue or energy proceeding from God. 3. But my third observation is, that if there are passages in which the Holy Ghost is clearly and unequivocally described as a person, then, however numerous the passages may be in which " the Spirit of God" appears to be a phrase meaning gifts and powers communi- cated to men, this does not in the least invalidate the evidence of the personality of the Spirit, because it is a most natural and intelligible figure to express the gifts and powers by the name of that person who is represented as the distributer of them. The true method, then, of stating the question upon this subject between the So- cinians and other Christians, is not, whether it be possible to inter- pret a great number of passages that speak of the Spirit of God, without being obliged to suppose that there is a distinct Person to whom this name is given, but whether there are not some passages by which the personahty of the Spirit may be clearly ascertained. There are two passages of this last kind to which I would direct your attention. The first is, the long discourse of our Lord, in chaps, xiv. XV. and xvi. of John's Gospel, where, in promising the Holy Ghost to the apostles, he describes him as a person who was to be sent and to come, who hears, and speaks, and reproves, and instructs ; as a person different from Jesus, because he was to come after Jesus departed, because he was to be sent by Christ, and to receive of Christ, and to glorify Christ ; as a person different from the Father, because he was to be sent by the Father, and because he was not to speak of himself, but to speak what he should hear. The second passage is a discourse of the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. xh. 1 — 13, where the apostle, in speaking of the diversities of spiritual gifts, represents them as under the administration of one Spirit. It is impossible to conceive words which can mark more strongly than the 11th verse does, that there is a Person who is the author of all spiritual gifts, and who distributes them according to his discretion. You will meet, in the collection of texts upon this subject, with many other passages which show that the apostles considered the Spirit as a person : and to the inference obviously suggested by all these passages, you are to add this general consideration, that as the prosopopoeia, to which the Socinians have recourse in order to evade the evidence of the personality of the Spirit, appears to be forced and unnatural, when it is applied to the long discourse recorded by John, so the supposition of any such prosopopoeia being there intended, is rendered incredible by our Lord's introducing, after that discourse, the Holy Ghost in the form of baptism, and thus conjoining the Holy Ghost, whom he had described as a person, with the Father and the Son, who are certainly known to be persons. There is, in all this, a continued train of argument, so much fitted to impress our minds with 33* \ 366 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE SPIRIT. a conviction of the personality of the Spirit, that, if the Socinian sys- tem on this subject be true, it will be hard to fix upon any inference from the language of Scripture in which our minds may safely acquiesce. 4. My fourth observation is, that if the Spirit of God be a person, it follows of course that he is God. I do not say that the Spirit is anywhere in Scripture directly called God : and although the writers on this subject have repeatedly said that this name is given him by implication, because, Acts v. 3, 4, lying to the Holy Ghost is stated as the same as lying to God ; and our bodies are called, 1 Cor. vi. 19, the temple of the Holy Ghost, and 1 Cor. iii. 16, the temple of God, yet I would not rest so important an article of faith upon this kind of verbal criticism. The clear proof of the divinity of the Holy Ghost f may in my opinion be thus shortly stated. Since all spiritual gifts are represented as being placed under the administration of this per- son ; since blasphemy against him is declared to be an unpardonable sin ; since our Lord commands Christians to be baptized into the name of this person as well as into the name of the Father and the Son ; and since the apostle Paul prays or wishes for the comnmnion of the Holy Ghost as for the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God, it is plain that the Scriptures teach us to honour and worship this person as we honour the Father and the Son ; and it is not to be supposed that if he bore to these two persons the relation of a creature to the Creator, we should be in this manner led to con- sider all the three as of the same nature. So much force is there in this argument, that the supposition of the Spirit's being a creature has long been abandoned. It has not even that support which the Socinian opinion concerning Jesus Christ appears to derive from the expressions relating to his humanity. The Spirit is nowhere spoken of in those humble terms which belong to the man Christ Jesus : and they who are not disposed to admit his divinity, finding no warrant for affixing to him any lower character, are obliged to deny his existence, by resolving all that is said of him into a figure of speech. Your business, therefore, in studying the controversy concerning the Spirit, is to examine whether this figure of speech, which is natural in some passages, can be admitted as the explication of all ; or whether the impropriety of attempting to introduce it into some places where the Spirit is described, be not so glaring as to leave a convic- tion upon the mind of every candid inquirer, that the Scriptures reveal to us a third person, whose agency is exerted in accomplishing the purposes of the Gospel : and if your minds are satisfied of the person- ality of the Spirit, you have next to examine whether the descriptions of this person, being incompatible with the notion of that inferiority of character which belongs to a creature, do not lead you to consider him as truly and properly God. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 367 CHAPTER X. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. From the information which is given us concerning the two per- sons whom the Gospel reveals, it appears to follow that both tlie Son and the Holy Ghost are truly and essentially God. But this com- munication of the attributes, the names, and the honours which belong to God the Father, implies that these two persons have an intimate connexion with him, and with one another : and we are thus led, after considering the two persons singly, to attend to the manner in which they are united with the Father. For when reason is able to deduce from Scriptiue that there are three persons, each of whom is God, that curiosity, which is inseparable from the exercise of our powers, renders her solicitous to investigate the connexion that sub- sists amongst the three : and it is not till after she has made many unsuccessful attempts, that she is forced to acquiesce in a conscious- ness of her inability to form a clear apprehension of the subject. I am now therefore to subjoin to the Scripture account of the Son and the Holy Ghost, a view of the opinions that have been held con- cerning the manner in which they are united with the Father; a subject which is known in theology by the name of the Doctrine of the Trinity. In stating these opinions, I shall not recite a great deal that I have read without being able to penetrate its meaning ; nor shall I attempt to go minutely through all the shades of difference that may be traced ; but I shall produce the fruit which I gathered from a wearisome perusal of many authors, by marking the great outlines of the three systems upon this subject, which stand forth most clearly distinguished from one another. I shall give them the names of the Sabellian, the Arian, and the Catholic systems. I call the third the Catholic system, because it is the opinion concerning the Trinity which has generally obtained in the Christian Church. Section I. The point, from which a simple distinct exposition of opinions con- cerning the Trinity sets out, is that fundamental doctrine of natural religion, the unity of God. Although the heathens muhiplied gods, yet, even in their popular mythology, a wide distinction was made between the subordinate deities and that Supreme Being from whom they were derived, and by whom they were controlled; and the more enlightened that the mind of any philosopher became, he rose the nearer to an apprehension of the divine unity. Our notions of 368 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. the perfection of the divhie nature involve tlie idea of unity ; and that nice analogy of parts, which a skilful observer discovers' in the works of nature and Providence, is an experimental confirmation of all the reasonings upon which this idea is founded. The law of Moses, which separated the Jews from the worship of the gods of the nations, declares that there is none other besides him, and asserts his unity in these words, Deut. vi. 4, « Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." Our Saviour, Mark xii. 32, adopts the unhy of God as the principle of the first and great commandment of his 'reli- gion. In another place, Mark x. 18, he disclaims the appellation of good, saying, " there is none good but one, that is God." The divine unity is asserted in the strongest terms by his apostles, " To us there is but one God, the only wise God, who only hath immortality."* It is said that those who were converted, " turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God ;"t and we cannot read the New Testament without being strongly impressed with this truth, that the supposition of a number of gods, which philosophy and Judaism discard, is most repugnant to the perfect revelation made by Him who came from the bosom of the Father, to declare God to man. If there be truth in this first principle of natural religion, so earnestly inculcated by the general strain of the New Testament, then th'e Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost cannot be three Gods, but there must be a sense in which these three Persons are one God. Our Lord has been generally understood to intimate that there is such a sense, when he says, John x. 30, " I and my Father are one ;" and his apostle says the same thing with regard to all the three, 1 John V. 7. It is proper, however, that you should be aware of the objec- tions that have been made to this application of these two texts. With regard to the first, it has been said that the words of our Lord do not necessarily imply that unity of which we are speaking, and that, whether we consider the context, or the similar expressions which he uses in the seventeenth chapter of John, his words may mean no more than this, I and my Father are one in purpose, i. e. his power, which none can resist, is always exerted in carrying into efl'ect my gracious designs towards my disciples. With regard to the second text, it has been said that the whole verse is an interpolation, because it is wanting in many Greek manuscripts, and because it is not quoted by any Christian father who wrote in Greek before the Council of Nice. The authenticity of this verse is certainly proble- matical, for very able judges have formed different opinions concern- ing it. Mill, the celebrated editor of the New Testament, in the beginning of the last century, after stating at great length the argu- ments upon both sides, gives it as his judgment, that the verse is genuine. But Griesbach, the latest editor of the New Testament, after a long investigation, declares in the most decided manner, that the strongest testimonies and arguments are against this verse ; and that, if it is admitted npon the slight grounds which have been alleged in defence of it, Textus Novi Teslamenti iiniversus plane incertus esset tttque dubiiis. This was also the opinion of Porson, the late celebrated Greek Professor in England, and of Herbert Marsh, the * 1 Cor. viii. 6. 1 Tim. i. 17 ; vi. 16. f 1 Thes. i. 9. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITr. 369 Editor of Michaelis. I must accede to such authorities— and I have further to say, that even aUhough we should admit this verse, we cannot positively athrm that it teaches an unity of nature in three persons ; for it may mean nothing more than an agreement in that record, which all the three are there said to bear. It is not, then, upon this controverted verse in John's Epistle, nor upon the probability, however strong, that the emphatical words of our Lord, " I and my Father are one," mean something more than an unity of purpose, that the unity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ought to be rested ; but it is upon the following clear induction. The Scriptures, in conformity with right reason, declare that there is one God : at the same time, they lead us to consider every one of three Persons as truly God. But the one of these pro- positions must be employed to qualify the other ; and therefore there certainly is some sense in which these three persons are one God. This induction is confirmed by the language of the New Testament, which never speaks of three Gods, but uniformly mentions these three persons in such a manner as to suggest an union of council and operation infinitely more perfect than any which we behold. The force of the induction which I have now stated has been felt in all ages of the church. The earliest Christian writers, who paid the same honours to the Son and to the Holy Ghost as to the Father, declared their abhorrence of polytheism, and considered themselves as worshippers of the one true God. In the second century, the word rgtaj, trinitas, was imported from the Platonic school, to express the union of the three persons ; and the whole succession of Ante-Nicene fathers, although their illustrations are not always the most pertinent, discover by innumerable passages that they worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, as constituting what TertuUian calls, hi the second century, Triniias unius divinitatis, and Cyprian, in the third, Adunata trinitas, and Athanasius, in the fourth, oScaigfT-oj Section II. The first attempt, in the way of speculation, to reconcile with the unity of the Godhead what Christians had learnt to call the Trinity, was made in the second century by Praxeas, and was continued, in the beginning of the third century, by Noetus, and in the middle of it by Sabellius. There may be some shades of difference in the opi- nions of these three men : but as the leading parts of their systeni were the same, the names of Praxeas and Noetus came to be lost in the name of Sabellius, and the points common to all the three consti- tute that system of the Trinity which is known by the name of Sa- bellianism. According to this system, God is one Person, who, at his pleasure, presents to mortals the different aspects of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. In respect of his creating and preserving all things, he is the Father ; in respect of what he did as the Redeemer of men, he is the Son ; and in respect of those influences which he exerts in their sanctification, he is the Holy Ghost. The accounts which an- "3D 370 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. cient writers give of the opinions of Sabellius lead us to thinlc that he considered the distinction of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as merely nominal, calling God r^icow^os. But several circumstances, collected by the acute and industrious Mosheim, render it probable that Sabellius conceived a ray or portion emitted from the divine sub- stance to have been joined to the man Jesus Christ, in order to form the Son ; so that his opinion concerning the JPerson of Christ coin- cided with that of the Gnostics, who considered Jesus Christ as a man to whom an emanation of the Supreme ]VIind was united, and with that of the modern Socinians, who consider the power and wisdom of God as dwelling in the man Christ Jesus. But even after this re- finement upon the opinions of Praxeas and Noetus; God continued to be stated in this system as one person, who assumes different names from the different aspects, which himself or a part of himself pre- sents : and the true character of Sabellianism is this, that it destroys the distinction of persons Avhich the Scriptures teach, confounding the sender with the person sent, him that begat with him that is begot- ten, and the Holy Ghost with the Father, from whom he is said to proceed. TertuUian, who wrote against Praxeas in the second cen- tury, and the Avriters of the third who opposed Sabellius, urge with great strength of argument the various passages in which this dis- tinction is expressed or implied : and that they might place in the most odious light the doctrine by which it was confounded, they gave to Sabellius and his followers the name of Patropassians, meaning to represent it as a consequence of their doctrine, that the God and Fa- ther of all had endured those sufferings which the Scriptures ascribe to Jesus Christ. Sabellianism preserves in the most perfect manner the unity of God ; and on this accomit it may appear to be the most philosophical scheme of the Trinity. But insuperable objections to it arise from the language and views introduced into the New Testament. Those who wrote after this system was first published, were so sensible of the force of these objections, that they discover an extreme solicitude to express clearly the distinction between the Father and the Son. They were sometimes led by this solicitude into modes of speaking, which have been represented as inconsistent with a belief of the divi- nity of the Son ; and the great controversy which was agitated about a hundred years ago, with regard to the opinion of the Ante-Nicene fathers concerning the person of the Son, took its rise from this cir- cumstance, that there being in their times some who denied the divi- nity of our Saviour, and others who denied the distinction of persons in the Godhead, these fathers wrote against both, and, from their zeal for the truth, or from the eagerness of controversy, used expressions in attacking the one of those heresies, which it is not easy to recon- cile with the expressions used against the opposite heresy. The language employed by some of the ancient writers in con- demning Sabellianism encouraged Arius, about the beginning of the fourth centuiy, to avoid every appearance of confounding the person of the Father and the Son, by broaching an opinion whicli his con- temporaries represent as an innovation, till that time unheard of He said that the Son was a creature who had no existence till he was made by God out of nothing — that his being begotten means nothing DOCTRINE OP THE TRINITY. 371 more than liis being made by the will of the Father — and that this peculiar term is applied to him, because he was made before all other creatures, that he might be the instrument of the Almighty in creat- ing them. By this system Arius steered clear of Sabellianism, and at the same time he preserved the unity of God. For Jesus Christ, according to him, is in reality a creature, and only called God upon account of the othces in which he was employed, and the honour and dignity with which he Avas invested by the Father Almighty. To Arius, therefore, there was but one God, in the proper sense of that word : but as he admitted that Jesus Christ, a different person from the Father, was also God, because he was constituted God, ins opi- nion must be stated as one of the ancient systems of the Trinity. I have formerly explained,* at great length, the grounds upon which this opinion of Arius concerning the Son was rejected by the Christian church. At present I have to advert to the meaning of those terms in which the council of Nice, A. D. 325, expressed their condemnation of this opinion. The council, who knew the sense in which Arius applied the words God, and only begotten Son of God, to Jesus Christ, wished to frame such a creed as could not be repeated by those who held the Arian opinions; and with this view they made a large addition to the second article of the ancient creed, and annexed to the creed a condemnatory clause,! The word, in this addition, which requires the most particular at- tention, upon account of its frequent use in the controversy concern- ing the Trinity, is uixoovsMi. It is compounded of iftoj, idem, and ou-na, substantia ; denoting that which is of the same substance or essence with another. It had been used by classical Greek writers in this sense. So Aristotle says, oftoowia Tta-vt 0.0.^^0.. It had been applied J by Christian writers long before the council of Nice, in the very sense in which it was used by the council : and it only expresses the amoinit of those images which had been employed by the succession of writers from the earliest times, to mark the relation between the Fa- ther and the Son, one of the most common and significant of which is introduced into the creed itself, t"? ^^ ^uro;. As a derived light is the same in nature with the original light at which it was kindled, so, whatever be the meaning of ^<^^ when applied to the Father, the word must have the same meaning when the Son is called i|>"? (x -oyo5, arose from the meaning of that word. It was said by the Platonic fathers, that " God, being an eternal intelligence, from the beginning had the ?.o-/oj in himself, being eternally rational ;"' and hence they often called Jesus Christ ?-o>oj cuStoj rtaTgoj. I shall illustrate this principle by the words of Bishop Horsley, who concurs in it with the ancient Platonists. '' The per- sonal subsistence of a divine ^-oyo, is implied in the very idea of a God. The argument rests on a principle v^diich was common to all the Platonic fathers, and seems to be founded on Scripture, that the ex- istence of the Son flows necessarily from the divine intellect exerted on itself; from the Father's contemplation of his own perfections. For as the Father ever was, his perfections have for ever been, and his intellect hath been ever active. But perfections which have ever been, the ever-active intellect must ever have contemplated ; and the contemplation which hath ever been, must ever have been accom- panied with its just effect, the personal existence of the Son."t This method of illustrating the necessary co-existence of the Son with the Father, which has passed from the Platonic fathers of the second century through a succession of Athanasian writers to the present time, does certainly convey to ordinary readers an idea that the Son is merely an attribute of the Father, the reason of God ; and, accordingly. Dr. Priestley and others have represented the earlier writers who called the Son J-oyoj, as speaking a Sabellian language ; and they say that it was to avoid the Sabellianism implied in the use of this word, that the Arians made a distinction between the ^o-^oj, which always was with God, i. e. his own reason, and the ^-cyoj by whom he made the world, i. e. the person whom he created to be the instrument of making other things. The former is ?.oyo5 iv^toSircc, ratio insita, reason. The latter is >.oyo; rt§c$o^txoj, ratio prolata, speech, reason, brought forth in words. The Son, said Arius, might be com- pared to the latter, in order to express that he proceeded immediately from God, but he cannot be compared to the former, which means only an attribute of the Deity. This was a distinction, by which Arius wished not only to avoid the appearance of Sabellianism, but also to evade the argument, for the necessary and eternal co-existence of the Son with the Father, drawn from his being called >-0705 Ofoj;. It cannot be denied that the analogy between the relation of the Father to * Bull, D. F. N. 199. . t Horsley's Tracts, p. 61. 3d. edit. DOCTRIXE OF THE TRIMXr. 377 the >-oyo?, and the relation of every man's mind to its own thoughts, which the early writers laid hold of as furnishing an argument for the eternal co-existence of the Son, was pursued too far by some of them, and that the obscurity and inconsistency which always tlow from an abuse of images, was the consequence. At the same time, it is cer- tain that the very same writers, who make the most frequent use of this image, far from conceiving the ?-o-;0? to be an attribute of the Father, speak of the Son as a distinct person, and as eternal ; it has been made probable by Bishop Bull, that, when they spoke of ^jo-o? «4ta9croj, they meant a person, the offspring of the divine mind, who having been from eternity with the Father, became before the creation >-o',ci Tt^^po^ixor, and we know that Athanasius, probably aware of the abuse of this image, does not approve of applying either f-oyoi n-6ia9etoi or >j>io; .-t^o^oetxor as a description of the Son, but calls him vloc avTortyjr:. The distinction, which the ancient Catholic writers upon the Trinity made between J^y^j frSta^troj and >-0;W neopoeixo;, is connected with a circumstance ^vhich has contributed very much to this apparent embarrassment and contradiction in what they say of the person of the Son. The circumstance is this, that the generation of the Son has with them different meanings, according as it respects the divine nature of this person, or his exertions towards the creatures. The generation of the Son properly means the manner in which the divine essence was from all eternity communicated to him. In respect of this, he is styled in Scripture uMoynri .ta^a .tor^oj ; and, in the Nicene creed, ©foj « eim.-; and, in reference to this, Athanasius says, 0{o> ojn.ii' -ati zov v'lov rcarr^ (ifi. But the aucicuts oftcu speak of a generation of the Son which took place at a particular time, immediately befoiie the creation of the world. By this they mean, not the beginning of his existence, but the display of his powers in the production of external objects. In reference to this, Athanasius explains the expression which Paul applies to the Son, new-roroxoj na^r? xnr.ti^e, begotten before all creation : not that he then began to he, for he»had existed as a distinct person from all eternity, but he had remained with the Father without exerting his powers upon external objects, and at the creation came forth from the Father. This, therefore, was properly named rtfo^y^rtj — Tt^oSoyjr, prolatio, the projection of his energies ; and the ancient writers who gave it the name of genera- tion, never conceived that this coming forth to act was the beginning of the Son's existence. But the Arians, laying hold of this improper expression, and shelterins their opinion concerning the creation of the Son under what the ancients had said of his figurative generation, declared it to be an article o( their faith, that the Son did not exist before he was begotten. The declaration appears to carry intrinsic evidence of its own truth. Yet the council of Nice condemned those who say of the Son n^iv yn-vrerxxu otxrr:a part of the anathematizing clause, of which we could not make sense, if we d*d not know that the ancient writers, who say that the Son was begotten when he came forth to create, tmderstood by this expression merely a figura- tive generation, not the beginning of his existence but the exertion of his powers, and that they believed that before this ri^otuv-^u, o >.o^t>j, as John speaks, r» -teoj rot ©jw. There is yet a third generation of which the ancients speak, when 34* SE 378 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. " the Word was made flesh." This generation is part of that otxoiouia which the Scriptures reveal, and there is much better authority for applying the word generation in this sense than in the former. For the angel said to Mary, " the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, — therefore, also, that hol)^ thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."* It is plain from what has been said, that neither the Tt^oi^Bvavi of the Son, nor his incarnation, has any connexion with the manner of his being. They were only what the ancients called cvyxata^cxastu acts of condescension in a person who had a complete existence. But in this view they serve to illustrate the first principle of wliich we are now speaking. For, by being acts of condescension, they imply that subordination in the Son which results from the Father's being the foundation of deity. There cannot be degrees of perfection in the godhead, a greater and a less divinity ; and, if the Son be o^oovaioi Ttaf^i, he must possess all the essential perfections of deity. But he is, in this respect, less than the Father, that he hath received them from him. He is avtoOioi, a word of frequent use among the ancient writers of the Trinity, if the word be understood to mean ipse Dens, very God, but he is not avToOsoi if the word be understood to mean Dens a se ipso ; for, in this sense, the Father alone is avtodeoi, while the Son is ^soj IX ^lov. When Jesus therefore, says, " my Father is greater than I," although, upon the principles of the third system, he cannot mean any ditference of nature, he may mean that pre-eminence of tlie Father which is necessarily implied in his being ayfijjjroj; a pre- eminence which does not appear to us to admit of any act of condes- cension in the Father, of his receiving a commission, or being appointed to hold an office ; whereas there is a manifest congruity in the Son, who derived his nature from the Father, being employed to exert the perfections of the godhead in the accomplishment of a particular purpose. Hence, as our Lord speaks of the FatJjer's giving him a commission, of his being sent by God, of his coming to do the will of God, so those ancient writers who represent the Son as equal to the Father, speak of him at the same time as ayyi^o;, irtt^^ctt;? Qcov; and the fitness of that oixonoj-ua., which he undertook for the salvation of mankind, results from the essential subordination of the Son to the Father. In like manner, the Spirit who " proceedeth from the Father" is, upon that account, subordinate to the Father. Hence, in numberless places of Scripture, he is both called the Spirit of God, and is said to be sent by the Father, But the Scriptures intimate also a subordina- tion of the Spirit to the Son, for he is called the Spirit of Christ. Jesus says, in the discourse formerly quoted from John's Gospel, " I will send him — He shall glorify me ; for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it to you."' It is not indeed any where said in Scripture, that the Spirit proceedeth from the Son, and, for this reason, the council of Constantinople, A.D. 381, when they condemned the errors of Macedonius, introduced amongst the exalted tides which they applied to the Spirit, this designation, taken literally from Scripture, TO £x tov ftat^oi exrto^evoixsiw. In the fifteenth century it became a con- * Luke i. 35. f John xv. 26 ; xvi. 14. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 379 troversy whether the Spirit, not in respect of occasional mission, for none could deny what tlie Scriptures say that the Spirit is sent by the Son, but, in respect of liis nature, proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father. Most of the Greek Fathers, while they acknow- ledged the personality and divinity of the Spirit, would not adopt an expression concerning him, which appeared to them improper, because it is unscriptural, and preserved the language of the council of Con- stantinople, to rti'evjxa o ex tov rtar^oj ixTto^ivtrai,. But the Latin fathers argued in this manner. Since the Spirit, who is called in Scripture the Spirit of God, is called also the Spirit of his Son ; and since the Spirit, who is sent by the Father, is also said to be sent by the Son, it follows that there is the same subordination of the Spirit to the Son as to the Father. But the subordination of the Spirit to the Father is grounded upon his proceeding from the Father, and his being subordinate to the Son must have the same foundation, i. e. as the divine nature was communicated by the Father to the Son, so it was communicated by the Father and the Son to the Holy Ghost. Upon the strength of this reasoning, the Latin fathers made an addition to the creed of Constantinople, and instead of simply trans- lating the clause used in that creed, " qui a Patre procedlt,"" they said, ^'■qiii a Patre Jilioque procedity The Greek churches, who did not admit the truth of that which was added, were enraged at the presumption of the Latin churches in making an addition, upon account of their peculiar tenets, to a creed which had been composed by a general council, and had been declared to be unchangeable ; and a contention for authority thus mingling itself, as has often happened in the church of Christ, with a difference of opinion, the word '■'filioque" came to be an ostensible ground of that schism between the Greek and Latin churches, which began in the eighth century, and continues till this day. The reformed churches, without vindicat- ing the Latin church, or asserting its right to make the addition, acquiesce in the reasoning upon which its opinion was founded, and say with it that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the Son. I have now stated the full amount of the first principle, by which / I said, those who hold the third or Catholic system of the Trinity, / ♦ endeavour to maintain the unity of God. They do not believe in/ three unoriginated beings, co-ordinate and independent. But they/ believe in three persons, from the first of whom the second and third; did, from all eternity, derive the nature and perfections of the god4 head; and, upon this communication of the substance of the Father* to the Son, and the substance of the Father and the Son to the Holy Ghost, they ground that gradual subordination, which, with an entir^ sameness of nature, constitutes the most perfect consent and co-opera- tion of the three persons. But after we have admitted all that is implied in this first principle, the third system of the Trinity appears to fall very short of those conceptions of the unity of God which reason and Scripture teach us to form. We must therefore take into view the second principle. 2. It may be thus expressed ; the three persons are inseparably joined together. So necessary and indissoluble is this connexion, that as the Father never existed without the Son and the Spirit, so 3S0 DOCTRINE or THE TRINITY. the Son and the Spirit were not separated from him, by being produced out of his substance. Every idea of section, and division, and inter- val, which is suggested to us by material objects and by individuals of the same species, is to be laid aside when we raise our conceptions to that distinction of persons under which the Deity is revealed to us in the Scripture. We are to attempt to conceive that this distinction does not dissolve the continuity of nature — that while every one of the three persons has his distinct subsistence, they are never (WfftffKjjutfct There were two phrases which the ancient Catholics employed to mark this idea. In order to show that they did not consider the Son as sent forth from the Father, as our children are sent forth to have an existence separated from their parents, they called his generation an interior, not an external production, meaning that he remained in the Father, from whom he was produced ; and, in order to mark the in- dissoluble connexion of all the three persons, they used the word ■ri:^t.xi^^f]ii,i or £^rff^t;t"C'?crK» circu?n-incessio, which is thus defined, " that union by which one being exists in another, not only by a participa- tion of nature, but by the most intimate presence with it, so that, although the two beings are distinct, they dwell in and penetrate one another." They considered both these phrases as warranted by such expressions in Scripture as the following, John x. 38, " That ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him ;" and, John xiv. 10, " The Father that dwelleth in me, he doth the works." And they considered this indwelhng of the persons in one another as com- pleting the unity of God. If, upon this subject, they sometimes speak unintelligibly, and at other times approach to the language of Sabellianism, the apology is to be found in their own confession, that the manner of the divine existence is above the comprehension of man, and in their anxiety to reconcile a fundamental truth of natural religion with the discoveries of revelation. I cannot better illustrate the third or Catholic system which I have now delineated, than by giving an account of what is called the Platonic Trinity. I do not mean the Trinity held by Plato himself; for, although it has been said that this philosopher anticipated the revelation of three persons in the godhead, and that his philosophy prepared the world for receiving this incomprehensible truth, yet the passages relating to this subject, which I either found in his works, when I read them, or which I have, since that time, seen extracted from him, are so few in number, so short, and so obscure, that it seems to me impossible for any person, who had not much previous know- ledge of the subject, to draw that conclusion from them, which they have sometimes been brought to establish. It has been said indeed that the Trinity of persons in the Deity was a secret doctrine of Plato, which, although couched in his writings under dark words, was plainly taught, to those disciples who were able to receive it. I know not upon what evidence this is said ; but supposing it to be true, it must be allowed that this secret doctrine was not published to the world till the second or third century of the Christian era, when the Platonic school, following out the sublime views of the divine nature given by their master, which in some points corresponded with the Christian revela- DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 3S1 lion, and themselves enlightened by acquaintance with the gospel, which they could not fail to acquire while it was spreading over the Roman empire, and was embraced by many Platonists, brought for- ward in the language of Plato a scheme very mucli resembling what I called the third system of the Trinity. The following is a short view of this scheme, in the words of Bishop Horsley, who writes like one deeply read in ancient philoso- phy, and whose acknowledged eminence as a man of science procures credit for his account of the opinions of other men. Dr. Priestley having asserted in one of his publications, that it was never imagined that the three component members of the Platonic Trinity were either equal to each other, or were, strictly speaking, one, his zealous and able antagonist ascribes this assertion to an ignorance of the true prin- ciples of Platonism, and opposes to it the following account of these principles, which I gather from different parts of his 13th letter to Dr. Priestley. The three principles in the Deity are to ayaOoi; goodness, vovi, intelligence, ■^vxr;, vitality. These three, strictly speaking, are more one, than any thing in nature of which unity may be predicted. No one of them can be supposed without the other two. The second and third being, the first is necessarily supposed ; and the first being, the second and third must come forth. All the three were included by the Platonists in the divine nature, the T'o^ftov; a notion implying the same equality which the Christian Fathers maintained. To the first principle they ascribed an activity of a very peculiar kind — such as might be consistent with an undisturbed immutability. He acts fisvuiv IV mv-tov r;On, by a simplc iiidivisiblc unvaried energy ; which, as it cannot be broken into a multitude of distinct acts, cannot be adapted to the variety of external things ; on which, therefore, the first God acts not, either to create or to preserve them, otherwise than through the two subordinate principles. But eternal activity was supposed to be the consequence of the goodness of the Deity ; and from this eternal activity flowed, by necessary consequence, the existence of intellect, and the vital principle, in which alone the divine nature is active upon external things. Accor ing to this system too the world was supposed to be eternal, because it was conceived that the goodness of the Deity could not suffer that to be delayed which, because he hath done it, appears fit to be done. But the world was supposed to be eternal, not by its own nature, but by the choice of a free agent who might have willed the contrary ; Avhereas intellect and the vital principle have been eternal by necessity, as branches of the divinity ; and therefore, when the converted Platonists, upon the authority of revelation, discarded the notion of the world's eternity, they did not find themselves obliged to discard with it the eternity of thepovi, which they considered as equivalent to the Christian ^oyoj, because that was an eternity of quite another kind. Sucli is the view of the Platonic Trinity given by Dr. Horsley ; and in perfect conformity to this is the confession of his faith in the Chris- tian Trinity, which his 13th and 15th letters to Dr. Priestley contain, and which form the most useful recapitulation that I can give of what has been said upon the Catholic system. " I hold," says Dr. Hors- ley, " that the Father's faculties are not exerted on external things, otherwise than through the Son and the Holy Ghost ; that the Scrip- 382 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. tures, by discovering a trinity, teach clearly that the metaphysical unity of the divine nature is not an unity of persons, but that they do not teach such a separation and independence of these persons as amounts to tritheism. I maintain that the three persons are one being — one by mutual relation, indissolute connexion, and gradual sub- ordination ; so strictly one, that any individual thing in the whole world of matter and of spirit presents but a faint shadow of their unity. I maintain that each person by himself is God, because each possesses fully every attribute of the divine nature. But I maintain that these three Persons are all included in the very idea of God. I maintain the equality of the three Persons in all the attributes of the divine nature, and their equality in rank and authority with respect to all created things, whatever relations or differences may subsist between themselves. Differences there must be, lest we confound the persons, which was the error of Sabellius. But the differences can only consist in the personal properties, lest we divide the substance, and make a plurality of independent gods." Section IV. The third or Catholic system of the Trinity is the declared faith of both the established churches of Great Britain. The first of the thirty- nine articles of the church of England contains this clause : " And in the unity of this Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." And the creed called the Creed of Athanasius, because it delivers with great fulness of expression that doctrine of which he was the distin- guished champion, is appointed to be read upon certain days, as the most explicit declaration that the Church of England is equally re- moved from the Sabellian and the Arian systems. The words in the second chapter of our Confession of Faith are nearly the same with those of the first article of the Church of England. " In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity ; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding ; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father ; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son." And this doctrine is accounted by our church so essential, that it is introduced into the catechism which they recommend for the instruction of young persons in the principles of the Christian religion. In Scotland there were few publications during the course of the last century that particularly respected the doctrine of the Trinity ; and in most parts of the country the minds of the great body of the people, from tlie force of early instruction, acquiesce, perhaps without much speculation or inquiry, in the Catholic system. But in England many writers, since the beginning of the last century, have drawn a large share of the public attention, and have produced a considerable degree of agitation in the minds of Christians, by the theories which they have offered, in order to reconcile the trinity of persons with the unity of the Godhead. A particular account of these theories would DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITV. 383 lead into a very perplexed and tedious detail, and is in reality of no use, because all of them approach to one or other of the three systems that have been mentioned. By assuming a new name they may seem to keep clear of the objections that have been urged against their parent system ; but when they are narrowly canvassed, they are always found to be resolvable into the same principles, and they must be tried upon the same grounds. Although for these reasons I shall not recite the names of all who have held some particular opinion about the Trinity, or attempt to discriminate their tenets, there is one exception which I cannot avoid making. Dr. Samuel Clarke is so deservedly held hi high estimation for his abilities as a general scholar, and for the excellence and use- fulness both of his sermons and of his discourses on the evidence of natural and revealed religion ; his theory of the Trinity is a work executed with such labour and skill, and the controversy to which it gave occasion was carried on with such eagerness at the time, and is still referred to in so many theological treatises, that there would be an essential defect in this view of ophiions concerning the Trinity, if no particular notice were taken of his system. Dr. Clarke has entitled his book. The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity. The first part is a collection and explication of all the texts in the New Testament relating to the doctrine of the Trinity. The collection is a complete and a fair one ; his explication of some of the texts does not agree with the interpretation most generally re- ceived ; but he defends his criticisms like a scholar and an acute rea- soner ; and upon this collection of texts and his explication of them, is founded the second part, in which what he accounts the true doc- trine of the Trinity is set forth at large in fifty-five distinct propositions. He accompanies these propositions with references to the particular texts which support them, and often both with illustrations of his own, and with citations from ancient and modern writers ; his object being to show that the doctrine which he professes to ground upon the Scriptures is also agreeable to the sentiments of the succession of ecclesiastical writers. It has been said that there is not the same fair- ness hi his citations, as in the collection of texts. He not only omits those passages which are unfavourable to his own opinion, but he often leaves out parts of the sentences which he quotes, and he gives them in so detached a form, that they sometimes appear to speak a meaning perfectly different from that which a reader, who has an op- portunity of comparing them with the context, perceives to be the sense of the author. His book, therefore, is by no means a safe guide to those who wish to be instructed in the sentiments of the ancient church with regard to the Trinity. But to those who have derived that knowledge from other less exceptionable authority, or who read his book merely from a desire to know what Dr. Clarke himself thought, it presents the following consistent and intelligible scheme, which I give as the amount of the fifty-five propositions that consti- tute the second part of his book. There is one living intelligent agent, or person, who alone is self- existent, the author of all being and the origin of all power, who is supreme over all. With this first Supreme Cause and Father of all, there has existed from the beginning a second divine person, who is 384 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. his Word or Son, and a third divine person, who is liis Spirit ; and tliese three are distinguished in Scriptiu-e by their personal cliaracters. When the Scriptures mention the one God, the only God, or God by way of eminence, they always mean the Person of the Father. The Son derived his being and all his attributes from the Father, and therefore he is not the self-existent substance. But as the Scriptures have not declared the metaphysical manner of this derivation, they are worthy of censure who affirm that the Son was made out of no- thing ; and, as the Scriptures never make any limitation of time in declaring the Son's derivation from the Father, they are also worthy of censure who say that there was a time when the Son was not. The Son derived his being from the Father, not by mere necessity of nature, but by an act of the Father's incomprehensible power and will. In like manner, the Spirit, without any limitation of time, de- rived his being from the Father. The Son is sometimes called God, not on account of his metaphysical nature, hoAV divine soever, but on account of his relative attributes and divine authority communicated to him from the Father over us. To the Son are ascribed all com- municable divine powers, i. e. all powers which include not the inde- pendence and supreme authority by which the God and Father of all is distinguished ; for, in this the Son is evidently subordinate to the Father, that he derived his being, attributes, and power from the Father. Every action of the Son is only the exercise of the Father's power communicated to him, and the reason Avhy the Scriptures, although they style the Father God, and also style the Son God, yet at the same time always declare there is but one God, is, because there being in the monarchy of the universe but one authority, origi- nal in the Father, derivative in the Son, therefore the one God, abso- lutely speaking, always signifies him in whom the power and authority is original and underived. In like manner, the Holy Spirit, whatever his metaphysical nature be, and whatever divine power or dignity be ascribed to him, is evidently subordinate to the Father ; and, in Scrip- ture, he is also represented as subordinate to the Son, both by nature and by the will of the Father. And thus all authority and power is original in the Father, and from him derived to the Son, and exer- cised according to the will of the Father, by the operation of the Son, and by the influences of the Spirit. This system was regarded at its first appearance as heretical. A prosecution was commenced against the author by the lower house of Convocation in England ; and he was attacked by many divines, at the head of Avhom is Dr. Waterland. After reading a great part of what has been written by Dr. Clarke and his antagonists, it appears to me that the diflerence between them may be stated Avithin a nar- row compass. Dr. Clarke avoids the most offensive expressions used by the Arians. Instead of calling Christ a creature, or limiting the beginning of his existence, he says " that the Son was eternally be- gotten by the will of the Father." But the word eternally in this sentence means nothing more than that the Son was begotten before all ages, before those measures of time which the succession of created objects furnishes, in the incomprehensible duration of the Father's eternity : and the phrase " by the will of the Father," implies that the Father might not have produced the Son, or that he might have DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 385 produced him at any other time as well as at the time when he did ; so that however great the powers are which the Father hath been pleased to communicate to the Son, he is not essentially God, but there are, in the manner of his existence, a mutability and a depen- dence inconsistent with our ideas of the Divine Nature. The opinion of Dr. Clarke, therefore, is in reality that of Semi-Arians, who were called Homoiousians, because they exalted Christ above the rank of creatures, and held that, not by necessity of nature, but by special privilege, he was like to God. On the other hand, according to the third system, eternity in its proper sense, and necessary existence, are ascribed to the Son. All the attributes of the Godhead are conceived to belong to him by nature, and it is not supposed possible that he could be other than that which he is. Dr. Clarke and his opponents agree that the Son is not self-existent ; for both account the Father tlie fountain of deity. . But Dr. Clarke thinks, that, since the Son is not self-existent, he does not exist necessarily, while his opponents aflirm, that, with the consent of the Father, and according to his will yet by necessity of nature, the Son derived his being from the Father. Dr. Clarke and his opponents agree that the Son is subordinate to the Father ; but the subordination of Dr. Clarke implies an essential infe- riority of nature, while his opponents do not admit of any difference in point of duration or dignity, and understand the word subordina- tion as respecting merely order. Dr. Clarke and his opponents agree that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are three distinct persons, to every one of whom the name God is applied : but Dr. Clarke considers that name as belonging in its highest sense to the Father, and only in an inferior sense to the other two, and thus main- tains the unity of the Godhead upon the same principle with the Arian system, while his opponents, making no distinction between the word of God when applied in Scripture to the Father, and the same word when applied in Scripture to the Son, and inferring, from the language of Scripture, that it may also be applied to the Spirit, have recourse to the principles which were stated under the third system, for maintaining the unity of three persons, each of whom is truly God. In stating this unity, the opponents of Dr. Clarke adhered to the word which had been used by the council of Nice, saying that the three persons were ofioovsoo^, con-substantial, which is rendered, both in the English Articles, and in our Confession of Faith, " of one sub- stance." It did not escape the acuteness of Dr. Clarke, that the phrase is ambiguous. " One substance" may mean one numerical substance, i. e. a substance which is one in number, individual ; or one generical substance, i. e. the same in kind, that which belongs to all of one kind, as Aristotle said all the stars are ouoovgm. On account of this ambiguity Dr. Clarke required his opponents to declare in what sense they understood the word ; and by a succession of writers, who followed his steps, and wished to expose the third system as untenable, the following dilemma is often stated. " If you mean, by con-sub- stantial, that the three persons are of the same individual substance, you destroy their personality ; for three persons, of whom each has not his own distinct substance, but who are in one substance, are only dif- ferent modifications or manners of being, so that your Trinity becomes nominal and ideal, and in your zeal for the unity of the godhead, you 35 3 F 386 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. * recur to Sabelliaiiism. If, on the other hand, you mean by con-sub- stantial, that the three persons are of the same generical substance, then you destroy their unity ; for three persons, having the same sub- stance in kind, have each of them his own substance, and are, in reahty, three beings." This dilemma, like many others which appear to be inextricable, is merely captious. P'or the ancients, who seem to have understood o^oovatof, as marking a generical identity of substance, declare that they consider the three persons as not separated from one another like three individuals of the same species, but as united in a manner more per- fect than we are able to conceive ; and the moderns, many of whom seem to understand con-substantial as marking a numerical identity of substance, declare that they consider each of the three persons as having a distinct subsistence, and the divine substance as in this respect essentially distinguished from every thing material, that with- out diminution or division it extends to three persons. The difficulty, therefore, arising from the ambiguity of the word con-substantial, with which those who hold the Catholic system have been so often pressed, is .only a proof that it is a vain attempt to apply the terms of human science to the manner of the divine existence, and that the multiplication of words upon this subject does not in any degree increase the stock of our ideas. We are thus brought back, after reviewing a multiplicity of opinions, to the few simple positions which constitute the whole amount of the knowledge that Scripture has given us concerning the Trinity, and which may be thus briefly stated. The Scriptures, while they declare the fundamental truth of natural religion, that God is one, reveal two persons, each of whom, with the Father, we are led to consider as God, and ascribe to all the three distinct personal pro- perties. It is impossible that the three can be one in the same sense in which they are three : and therefore it follows, by necessary infer- ence, that the unity of God is not an unity of persons ; but it does not follow that it may not be an unity of a more intimate kind than any which we behold. An unity of consent and will neither corresponds to the conclusions of reason, nor is by any means adequate to a great part of the language of Scripture, for both concur in leading us to suppose an unity of nature. Whether the substance common to the three persons be specifically or numerically the same, is a question, the discussion of which cannot advance our knowledge, because neither of the terms is applicable to the subject ; and, after all our researches and reading, we shall find ourselves just where we began, incapable of perceiving the manner in which the three persons partake of the same divine nature. But we are very shallow philosophers indeed, if we consider this as any reason for believing that they do not partake of it ; for we are by much too ignorant of the manner of the divine existence to be warranted to say that the distinction of persons is an infringement of the Divine unity, " It is strange bold- ness in men," says Bishop Stillingfleet, (iii. 352,) " to talk of contra- dictions in things above their reach. Hath not God revealed to us that he created all things ; and is it not reasonable for us to believe this, unless we are able to comprehend the manner of doing it ? Hath not God plainly revealed that there shall be a resurrection of the * DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 387 dead ? And must we think it unreasonable to believe it, till we are able to comprehend all the changes of the particles of matter from the creation to the general resurrection ? If nothing is to be believed but what may be comprehended, the very being of God must be rejected, and all his unsearchable perfections. If we believe the attributes of God to be infinite, how can we comprehend them ? We are strangely puzzled in plain, ordinary, finite things ; but it is madness to pretend to comprehend what is infinite ; and yet, if the perfections of God be not infinite, they cannot belong to him. Let those who presume to say that there is a contradiction in the Trinity, try their imaginations about God's eternity, not merely how he should be from himself, but how God should co-exist Avith all the differences of times, and yet there be no succession in his own being ; and they will perhaps con- cur with me in thinking that there is no greater difficulty in the con- ception of the Trinity than there is of eternity. For three to be one is a contradiction in numbers ; but whether an infinite nature can communicate itself to three different substances, without such a division as is among created beings, must not be determined by bare numbers, but by the absolute perfections of the divine nature : which must be owned to be above our comprehension." Since then the Scriptures teach that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one, and since the unity of three persons who partake of the same divine nature must of necessity be an unity of the most perfect kind, we may rest assured that the more we can abstract from every idea of inequality, division, and separation, provided we pre- serve the distinction of persons, our conceptions approach the nearer to the truth. But since the manner of the Divine existence is con- fessedly above our comprehension, and since no words or images that we can employ are found to correspond to the unity of these three persons, there are two inferences or advices that present themselves upon this subject, which I shall just mention in taking leave of it. The first inference is, that men of speculation ought to exercise mutual forbearance if they differ from one another in their attempts to explain that which all acknowledge to be inexplicable. It is vain to think of confining the human mind to those researches in which she may easily attain some certain conclusion. She loves to soar and to roam, and she gathers much wisdom from her own most adventm*- ous flights ; but this lesson surely should not be one of the last, that those who presume to expatiate in the sublime regions where the light of human science becomes dim and uncertain, need not be sur- prised to meet with many wanderers. Every sober inquirer who finds that, after all his investigations, the union of the three persons in the Godhead remains to him involved in impenetrable darkness, will judge with candour of the attempts made by other men to obtain a solution of the difficulties which presented themselves to their minds ; and he will not readily suppose that they doubt of the fact, although they may differ from him in the manner of explaining the fact. The second inference or advice is, that as you cannot expect to give the body of the people clear ideas of the manner in which the thTee persons are united, it may be better in discoursing to them, to avoid any particular discussion of this subject ; and to follow here, as in every other instance, the pattern of teaching set in the New Testa- 388 DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITr. meiit. Our Lord and his Apostles do not propose any metaphysical exphcation of the unity of the Divine nature. But they assume it, and declare it as a fundamental truth ; and they never insinuate that it is in the smallest degree infringed by the revelation which they give of the three persons. After this example, I advise y6u never to per- plex the minds of the people with different theories of the Trinity, and never to suggest that the unity of the Divine nature is a question- able point ; but without professing to explain how the three persons are united, to place before your hearers, as you have occasion, the Scripture account of the Son and the Holy Ghost, as well as of the Father, and thus to preserve upon their minds wliat the Scriptures have revealed, and what upon that account it is certainly of impor- tance for them to learn, the dignity of the second and third persons, their relation to us, and their power to execute the gracious offices necessary for our salvation. These essential points of Christian in- struction, which it is the duty of the ministers of the gospel to impress upon the people, are revealed in the Scriptures in such a manner as to be in no danger of leading into the Sabellian, the Arian, or the Tritheistic scheme of the Trinity ; and, therefore, if we adhere, as we ought always to do, to the pure revelation of Scripture in our account of the three persons, we have no occasion to expose to the people the defects of these schemes ; and we may reserve to ourselves all the speculations about the manner in which the three persons are united. I conclude this specimen of the variety of opinions, and of the kind of language which you may expect to find in ancient and modern writers upon the Trinity, with mentioning the books from which I have derived most assistance. The best writer in defence of the Catholic system of the Trinity is Bishop Bull. His works are published in a large folio volume, more than half of which is filled with the three following treatises : Defensio fidei NicensB — Judicium Ecclesiae Catholicse — Primitiva et Apostolica Traditio. All the three respect the Trinity, and are often quoted by succeeding writers, who borrow the greatest part of their matter from this very learned and able divine. His principal work is, Defensio fidei Nicense, which consists of four parts. 1. The ?f^oirfa^tt?, pre-exist- ence of the Son — 2. t-o 6;Uoov5to»', consubstantiality of the Son — 3, to awaihov, his eternal co-existence with the Father. 4. His subordination to the Father. Bishop Pearson, in his Exposition of the Creed, gives the same view of the Trinity with Bishop Bull ; which is the true Athanasian scheme ; and he states it as he states every other point in theology of which he treats, with clearness, with sound judgment, and with much learning. Dr. Cudworth, in that magazine of learning, which he calls the Intellectual System, gives a full view of the Chris- tian and the Platonic Trinity. If you consult, when you read him, the ingenious and learned notes which Mosheim has added to his Latin edition of Cudworth, you will be preserved from some errors, and your views of the subjects treated will be much enlightened and improved. When you come down to the last century, Dr. Clarke's Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity is the first book which will engage your attention. As a collection of texts upon the subject it is most useful ; as a view of the opinions of the ancient church it is to be read, for the reasons which I mentioned, with suspicion ; and as the argu- DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 389 ment of a very able and acute man, upon a subject which seems to have been near his heart, it is proper that you should read at the same time what was said by his opponents. There are two books by Dr. Waterland. The one. Sermons in Defence of the Divinity of Jesus Christ; the other, A Vindication of Christ's Divinity. And there is an excellent book, not so controversial as Dr. Waterland's, Avhich should be read by every student of divinity. A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, by Dr. Thomas Randolph. Dr. Ran- dolph opposes the principles of Dr. Clarke. But he writes directly in answer to a small book entitled. An Essay on Spirit, which presents a modification of the Arian System. You will read with pleasure a rational intelligible history of Arianism, which Dr. Jortin, who is very far from having any prejudice in favour of the Catholic system, gives in the third volume of his Remarks on Ecclesiastical History. I referred formerly to Ben Mordecai's Apology by Taylor. You will find many able attacks upon all the parts of the Catholic system, in the works of JSIr. Thomas Emlyn. — Mosheim, in his valuable work, De Rebus Christianorum ante Christianum Magnum, gives the most complete information as to Sabellianism, and the other early systems of the Trinity ; and his Church History joins to a short account of all the variety of opinions upon this subject, references to the authors who have treated of them more largely. Mr. Gibbon has introduced into his second volume a history of the Arian controversy, in which he professes to delineate the three systems of the Trinity. But there is the same inveterate prejudice against religion, and the same con- stant endeavour to turn into ridicule every branch of that subject, which disgrace so large a portion of the writings of this illustrious historian. Some of the books which I have mentioned will prepare you for reading this part of Gibbon, by enabling you to discern Avhere his account is lame, or unfair. Lardner, Priestley, Lindsey, and the other Socinians of later times, incline to the Sabellian system, and employ every art to represent the other two as contrary to Scripture, to reason, and to the opinions of the primitive church. They have been attacked by many modern writers. But you will need no other antidote to their heresy than the volume of tracts by Bishop Horsley, a formidable antagonist, whose superiority in argu- ment and in learning gives him some title to use that tone of disdain which pervades the volume. It consists of a charge to the clergy of his Archdeaconry, exposing the errors in one of Dr. Priestley's publica- tions ; of letters to Dr. Priestley, occasioned by his reply to the charge ; of a sermon on the incarnation, and of supplemental disquishions. Of other writers who have published particular schemes of the Trinity, I am almost entirely ignorant. From the short accounts of their works which have come in my way, I found that their schemes are only certain modifications of the first or the third systems, by which ingenious men have attempted to satisfy their own minds, or to remove the objections which others had made ; and knowing well that, after all our researches, difficulties must remain, and that these difficulties furnish no argument against the truth, I thought that my time might be employed more profitably than by labouring to fix in my mind their nice discriminations, winch it might be difficult to ^ apprehend and impossible to retain. 35* BOOK IV. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. Having given a view of the different opinions which have been held concerning the two persons, who are revealed in the gospel, I come now to treat of the remedy which was brought by the one of these persons, and is applied by the other. It appears to me that the best method in which I can state the most important questions in theology upon this great division of the subject, is by leading yon to attend to the opinions which have been held concerning the Nature — the Extent — and the Application of the remedy. By considering these three points in succession, we shall exhaust the remaining part of the Socinian, together with the Pelagian and Arminian controver- sies, and shall thus obtain, without more repetition than is unavoida- ble upon subjects so closely allied, a complete and connected view of the capital branches of controversial divinity. CHAPTER I. DISEASE FOR WHICH THE REMEDY IS PROVIDED. The gospel proceeds upon the supposition that all have sinned. It assumes the character of the religion of sinners, and professes to bring a remedy for the moral evil which exists in the world. Our attention is thus called back from the remedy to the disease ; for we cannot entertain just apprehensions of the nature of that provision wliich the gospel has made, unless we understand the circumstances which called for that provision ; and we may expect that those, who have formed ditierent systems with regard to the nature of the remedy, are not of the same opinion with regard to the disease. In one point 391 392 * DISEASE FOR WHICH THE however, all sects of Christians agree, that there is much sin in the world. The Socinian does not hesitate to say with the Calvinist, that all have sinned ; and those fanatics who conceived that ihcy them- selves had attained the perfection of virtue, were led, by this self- conceit, to magnify the wickedness of the rest of mankind. That men are sinners, is a point concerning which those who respect the authority of Scripture cannot entertain any doubt ; for it is uniformly taught there, from the period preceding the flood, when, as we read, " God saw that the wickedness of man was great."* At the appearance of Christianity, the angel gave to the son of Mary the name of Jesus, " for he shall save his people from their sins."t Jesus himself said, "they that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick ;"{ and Paul, the apostle of Jesus, in his Epistle to the Romans, builds his whole doctrine upon the position which he proves in the commencement, " that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin, and that the whole world is guilty before God."§ But this position does not rest entirely upon the authority of Scripture. It is abundantly established by the experience of all ages ; and they who never received the revelation of the gospel, agree with Christians in acknowledging I the fact upon which that revelation proceeds. The violence of human passions, the inefficacy of all the attempts which have been made since the beginning of legislation to restrain them, the secret wicked- ness which abounds, the horrors of remorse which rack the minds of some, the selt^-reproach of which those who are less guilty cannot divest themselves, and the dissatisfaction with their own attainments, which the most virtuous feel — these circumstances conspire in afford- ing the clearest evidence, that men do not act up to the dictates of right reason, but that the conduct of all falls short, in one degree or I other, of that standard which they perceive it to be both their duty and their interest to follow. Men will differ in their opinion of the grossness and the extent of the corruption of manners, according to the opportunities which they have had of observing it — according to the degree of severity in their natural disposition — according to the sentiments and principles which they had imbibed during their educa- tion, or which the reflections and habits of advanced life have formed ; but no diflerence in character or situation can render men wholly insensible to this corruption. Even those, who plead upon system for an indulgence to their own defects, meet with numberless instances where they cannot allow others to plead the same indulgence. The vices of one rank are regarded with contempt or with indignation by another ; and the easy accommodating moralist, who resolves the vices of the age into the progress of society, looks back with horror upon the enormities of former times. It is true that the forms of wickedness vary according to the state of society ; it is also true that some forms are marked with deeper depravity than others ; and it will not be denied by any scholar, that a concurrence of favourable circumstances has at some periods gone far to mitigate the atrocity of crimes, and to invigorate the exertions of virtue. But it is in the writings of the poets,not of the historians of antiquity, that a golden * Gen.vi. 5. f Mat. i. 21. i Mat. ix. 12. ^ Rom. iii. 9. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 393 age IS to be found. The authentic records of the civil and political transactions of man, from the earliest times, are full of the etfects of his wickedness ; no date is fixed in these records for the first introduction of sin into the world ; and all our information with regard to this most important era in chronology is derived from Scripture. Section I. It is well known that in the third chapter of the book of Genesis the first act of disobedience is related, and that the history of this act is connected with a command and a threatening, which had been mentioned in the second chapter. This interesting history demands our particular attention, when we are beginnhig to speak of that state of moral evil for which the gospel brings a remedy ; and in order to prepare you for the information which it conveys, it may be proper to mention two extremes, which are to be avoided in the interpreta- tion of this chapter. 1. Several parts of the history cannot be understood in a literal sense. Thus it is not to be supposed that the tree, of which man was forbidden to eat, had the power which the name seems to imply, and which the serpent suggests, of making those who ate the fruit of it wise, knowing good and evil ; neither is it to be supposed that the serpent at that time possessed those powers of speech and reason which the narration seems to ascribe to him, or that the plain mean- ing of these words, " the seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent," expresses the whole punishment of the tempter. — Several writers, indeed, who are disposed to turn the Scriptures into ridicule, have stated what they call the absurdity or the frivolousness of the literal sense, as a reason for rejecting both the narration and the books in which it is contained. But it has been well answered, that the narration bears upon the face of it the marks of that symbolical style which prevailed amongst all nations in early times from the poverty of language, and which, even after it has ceased to be neces- sary, continues to be used, both because it is ancient and because it is expressive. In this symbolical style, the objects of sense are em- ployed to represent the conceptions of the mind ; actions or things material to represent things spiritual ; and under words which are true when interpreted literally, there is couched some more exalted meaning. To the learned it cannot appear surprising, that the book which claims to be the most ancient should adopt a style which oc- curs in other early productions ; that a transaction, which assumes a date next to that of the creation, and the memory of which had pro- bably been preserved amongst the first men by symbols, should be recorded by the historian of a future age in a language which refer- red to these symbols ; and that circumstances might prevent him from attempting to remove the veil which this symbolical language threw over the transaction. If the rules for expounding the symbolical style, which have been hivestigated by the learned, are applied to the narration in the third 3G 3S^- DISEASE FOR WHICH THE chapter of Genesis, with the same candor with which they are usually applied to every other subject, the difhculties arising from the literal sense of the words will in a great measure vanish. It will readily be admitted, that although the tree did not possess any power of making those who ate the fruit of it wise, it might be called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because, the prohibition to eat of it being the trial of man's obedience, it was made known to other beings, by means of this tree, whether he was good or evil, and he himself, in eating of it, learnt by sad experience the distinction be- tween good and evil ; it will be admitted, that if an intelligent spirit chose for a season to conceal himself under the body of a serpent, the actions of this spirit might, during that time, be ascribed to a ser- pent ; and that if Moses had no commission to explain the rank, the character, and the motives of this spirit, because the state of rehgious knowledge which the world then possessed rendered it inexpedient for them to receive this communication, he could in no other way re- cord the transaction but by retaining the name of the animal under whose form the spirit had appeared ; and, if these things be admitted, it will follow that the words of the sentence, " it shall bruise thy head," are the most proper words that could have been used upon the occasion, because, while they apply literally to the animal, they admit easily a higher sense, in which they express the punishment of the spirit. 2. But although it be necessary to look beyond the literal sense of the words, in order to perceive the aptness and the signiiicancy of this history, I must warn you against another extreme. Some, with an excess of refinement, have sought to avoid the inconveniences of the literal sense, by considering the third chapter of Genesis as an allegory, not the history of a real transaction, but a moral painting of the violence of appetite, and the gradual introduction of vice in conjunction with the progress of knowledge and the improvements of society. But, however true it may be, that vice arises from the prevalence of appetite over reason, and that men in a civilized state know vices of which barbarous times are ignorant, yet there are two reasons which seem to render it impossible for those who respect the authority of Scripture, to admit this as the true interpretation of the third chapter of Genesis. 1. This chapter is part of a continued his- tory. It is inserted between the account of the creation of the first pair and the birth of their two sons ; and it explains the reason of their being driven out of that place, which we had been told in the second chapter had been allotted them by their Creator. Now, not only is it inconsistent with the gravity of an historian, but it detracts in a high degree from the authority of his writings, that in the pro- gress of relating facts so important he should introduce a chapter which, with all the appearance of being a continuation of the history, is only an allegorical representation of the change of manners. 2. The references to this third chapter, which are found in the New Tes- tament, are to us unquestionable vouchers of its being a real history. If you look to 2 Cor. xi. 3, you will perceive that the allusion of the apostle implies his conviction of the fact to which he alludes ; and, if you look to 1 Tim. ii. 13, 14, 15, you wiH find, that what was only implied in the former passage is there expressly asserted. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 395 The transgression of Adam is introduced as a fact of the same autho- rity and notoriety as his creation. The occasion of the transgression, viz. deceit — the order of the transgression, that the woman, not the man, was deceived — and one part of the punishment of the trans- gression, viz. " in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children" — these three important circumstances are mentioned in such a manner by the apostle, that the historical sense of the whole chapter may be consi- dered as having the sanction of his authority. It appears from these remarks that we are sufficiently warranted by the rules of sound criticism, in adopting that interpretation which hes in the middle between the two extremes ; and the middle inter- pretation is this, to consider the third chapter of Genesis as the history of a. real transaction which took place soon after the creation ; and as a history related after the symbolical manner common in early times, but exhibiting clearly uiider this manner the following im- portant facts. Adam and Eve, being tempted by the suggestions of an evil spirit who appeared to them under the form of a serpent, transgressed the commandment of iheir Creator. In consequence of this transgression, the ground which God had given them was cursed, sorrow became the portion of their life, and they were subjected to death, the sanction which God has annexed to his commandment. Sentence was also pronomiced upon the tempter. As he appeared before God in the same shape in which he tempted the woman, the Avhole of the sentence is applicable to a literal serpent : and the first part of it, Gen. iii. 14, has been generally understood to imply a degradation of the serpent from the figure wliich he had, and the life which he led before the temptation, to the state in which we see him. But the second part of the sentence, Gen. iii. 15, although applicable to the antipathy with which the human race regards an odious and dangerous animal, admits also of a higher sense ; and whatever it might convey to Adam and Eve, is now understood by us to be sig- nificant of that victory which the seed of the woman, i. e. a person descended from the woman, was at a future period to gain through suffering, over the evil spirit, who had assumed the form of a ser- pent. This middle interpretation of the third chapter of Genesis, which the rules of sound criticism warrant, is very much confirmed by its being agreeable to the sense of the Jewish church. Bishop Sherlock, with the ingenuity and ability which distinguish all his writings, has collected the evidence of this point in the third of his discourses upon prophecy, and in a dissertation annexed to them, entitled. The sense of the ancients before Christ upon the circumstances and consequences of the fall. His account of the history of that transaction is so sound and clear, that I shall give a short specimen of the manner in which he attempts to prove, that what I called the middle interpretation, is agreeable to the sense of the Jewish clun-ch. We know that the books of the Apocrypha were written before the days of our Saviour ; and in them we find the following expressions, which are clear evidences that the Jews of those days considered the third chapter of Genesis as the history of a real transaction, and at the same time looked beyond the literal sense. Wisd. ii. 23, 24, "For God created man to be mimortal, and made hun to be an image of 396 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE his own eternity. Nevertheless, through envy of the devil, came death into the world, and they that do hold of his side do find it." Eccles. XXV. 24, " Of the woman came the beginning of sin, and through her we all die." Dr. Sherlock traces in the book of Job, which we have reason to believe was written before any of the books of JNIoses, many delicate allusions to the circumstances mentioned in the third chapter of Genesis, sufficient to show that the transaction there recorded was known to the author of this book. The words of Zopliar, Job xx. 4, 5, 6, have a good moral meaning according to any interpretation which you can give them. But if you understand by the hypocrite, as the Chaldee paraphrast has done, the tempter or accuser, /. e. the spirit who tempted by deceit, and at the same time recollect the views suggested to Eve, and the punishment pronounced upon Adam, you will feel that the significancy and energy of the verses arc very much improved. The twenty-sixth chapter of Job is a magnificent description of the works of creation, and it concludes with these words, " By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens, his hand hath formed the crooked serpent. If nothing more is meant than the formation of the animal, it appears strange that an exertion of power so much inferior to all the others should be mentioned after them. But if the crooked serpent is employed to mark the spirit who once assumed that form, this expression forms a fit conclusion of the whole description, because it is the most explicit declaration of the sovereignty of God, in opposition to an opinion which early prevailed, that there is in nature an evil principle independent of the good. Dr. Sherlock further observes, that in different places of Isaiah and Micah, the enemies of God are metaphorically styled Leviathan, the crooked serpent, the dragon ; that the Son of God is represented by the Psalmist as treading upon the adder, and his enemies as licking the dust ; and that in one of those figurative descriptions of the new heavens and the new earth, i. e. the blessed change introduced by the dispensation of the Gospel, which occur often in Isaiah : the con- cluding words are, " And dust shall be the serpent's meat." Isaiah Ixv. 25. It will not appear to any person of taste that some of these allusions are of little avail in this argument, because they are expressed in few words ; for it is universally allowed that the shortest incidental refer- ence to an historical fact, by a subsequent writer, may be of such a kind as to afford a decisive proof of his knowledge of that fact ; and when we add to these allusions, what Bishop Sherlock's subject did not lead him to mention, the frequent references to this history which are found in the New Testament, it seems to be a matter beyond doubt tliat he has given a just account of the sense of the ancient Jewish church. Thus Paul says, Rom. v. 12, "By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin." Satan is styled in the book of Revelation, xii. 9, " the old serpent which deceive th the whole world ;" and John viii. 44, our Lord calls him a murderer and a liar from the beginning, a^egioTtoxrowj an:' a^xn'^i xm ■i'svatrju two names which most fitly express his having brought death upon the first pair by deceit. John says, 1 John iii. 8, " The devil sinneth from the begin- ning ; for this purpose the Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil ;" and. Rev. xx. 2, xii. 10, he represents REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 397 the coming of the kingdom of God, and the power of his Christ, by "that old serpent the accuser of the brethren being cast down." Christians are represented as partaking in this triumph ; for as Christ, while he was upon earth, gave his disciples power over all the power of the enemy, and made the spirits subject to them, so the apostle, writing to the church of Rome, says, Rom. xvi. 20, " And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly ;" and the last chap- ter of the book of Revelation describes, with the most marked allusion to the tliird chapter of Genesis, a time when all the effects of his temptation are to disappear. In Genesis, the ground is cursed, and a flaming sword guards the tree of life. In the Revelation, they who enter through the gates into the city, which is there described, are said to have a right to the tree of life ; the tree grows in the midst of the street, and on either side of the river ; and the leaves of it are for the healing of the nations ; and, it is added, there shall be no more curse. The effects of the curse are exhausted with regard to all who enter into the city. Thus the beginning and the end of the Bible lend their authority in support of each other. The transaction recorded in the beginning explains the reason of many expressions which occur in the progress of Scripture ; and the description which forms the con- clusion reflects light upon the opening. Whatever opinion we may entertain of the third chapter of Genesis when we read it singly, it swells in our conceptions as we advance ; and all its meaning and its importance become manifest, when we recognise the features of this early transaction in that magnificent scene by which the mystery of God shall be finished. Section II. I HAVE judged it necessary to unfold thus fully the principles upon which we interpret the account given in Scripture of the introduction of sin. The event thus interpreted is known by the name of the fall ; a word which does not occur in Scripture, but which has probably been borrowed by Christians from Wisdom x. 1. " She preserved the first formed father of the world, that was created alone, and brought him out of his fall." " His fall" is expressive of that change upon his mind, his body, and his outward circumstances, which was the consequence of Adam's transgression. Wishing to begin with the simplest view of the subject, I have not hitherto spoken of this event in any other light than as if it had been merely personal. But I have now to engage in those intricate ques- tions that liave been agitated concerning the effects, which the fall of Adam has produced upon his posterity. The opinions with regard to this matter may be reduced to four ; and the order of stating them is dictated by their nature, for they rise above one another in the follow- ing gradation, 1. The first opinion is that which was published by Pelagius, a Briton, A, D. 410, which was adopted by Socinus in the sixteenth century, and is held by the modern Socinians. It is admitted, even according to this opinion, that Adam, by eating of the tree of the 398 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE knowledge of good and evil, transgressed the divine commandment and exposed himself to the displeasure of his Creator. But the con- sequences of this displeasure are not considered as having impaired the powers of his nature, or as extending to his posterity in such a manner as to do them the smallest hurt. He was a fallible mortal crea- ture by the condition of his being, /. e. he was liable to sin from the moment that he was created, and he would have died whether he had sinned or not. He continued, after the action recorded in Genesis, to be such as he was at his creation, and all his posterity are born in similar circumstances. Adam was indeed driven from that paradise which had been assigned as his abode, and by many incon- veniences in his situation, was made to feel the effects of his trans- gression ; but these very inconveniences, while they reminded him that he had transgressed, tended to prevent him from going farther astray ; the labour with which he had to eat his bread was a salutary discipline, and the recollection of his folly became a lesson of wis- dom. The posterity of Adam in like manner are placed in a state of trial ; and as their minds are as enlightened and as virtuous as his was, their situation is not more unfavourable. Death to them, as to him, is a natural event, arising from the structure of the body, and indicated by many symptoms : and the shortness of their abode upon earth joins its influence to the common evils of life, in teaching them to apply their hearts to wisdom. If Adam and Eve, by being the first that sinned, had not any examples of vice to entice them, yet neither did they behold any examples of its punishment : whereas if we are in danger of following the vices of those who went before us, yet we may learn from the history of the world, and from our own observation, to guard against the fatal tendency of the principle of imitation. The amount then of this opinion is that our first parents, who sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, were not distinguished in any essential respect from those who sin in after ages, and that our con- dition is not the worse for their sin ; that as they were to blame for yielding to a temptation which they might have resisted, so all of us, by a proper attention in cultivating our natural powers, may main- tain our innocence amidst the temptations with which we are sur- rounded ; and, therefore, that we fall short of that which it is in our power to do, if we do not yield a more perfect obedience to the law of God than Adam yielded. There is a simplicity in this system which appears at first sight to recommend it. It seems to be rational and philosophical to say, that human nature is the same now as when it proceeded from the hands of the Creator, and to resolve the changes of character which it has exhibited, into the effects of the progress of society. But the fact is, that even the ancient philosophers did not consider this as a satisfying account of many circumstances in the present condition of human na- ture, and the account falls so very far short of all the views which the Scriptures give upon this subject, and requires such violence to be done to particular passages, that many, who are decidedly hostile to the Calvinistic system, finding the Pelagian untenable, have had re- course to a second opinion. 2. The second opinion may be called the Arminian, as deriving its REMEOr IS PROVIDED. 399 origin from Arminiiis, a divine of the seventeenth century. It holds the middle place between the Socinian and the Calvinistic systems. It is explained with clearness, and defended with much abiHty in a Latin treatise by Whitby, the commentator upon the New Testament, entitled, Tractatus de Imputatione Peccati ^Idami, from which I take the account of it that I am now to give. According to this opinion, although the first man had a body naturally frail and mortal, his life would have been for ever preserved by the bounty of his Creator, had he continued obedient ; and the instrument employed by God to preserve his mortal body from decay was the tree of life. Death was declared to be the penalty of trans- gression ; and, therefore, as soon as he transgressed, he was removed at a chstance from the tree of life ; and his posterity inheriting his natural mortality, and not having access to the tree of life, are sub- jected to death. It is therefore said by Paul, " By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men. In Adam all die. By one man's offence death reigned by one."* These expressions clearly point out death to be the conse- quence of Adam's transgression, an evil brought upon his posterity by his fault ; and this the Arminians understand to be the whole meaning of its being said, " Adam begat a son in his own hkeness, after his image ;"t and of Paul's saying, " We have borne the image of the earthly. "t It is admitted, however, by those who hold the second opinion, that this change upon the condition of mankind, from a life preserved without end, to mortality, was most unfavourable to their moral character. The fear of death enfeebles and enslaves the mind ; the pursuit of those things which are necessary to support a frail perishing life engrosses and contracts the soul ; and the desires of sensual plea- sure are rendered more eager and ungovernable, by the knowledge that the time of enjoying them soon passes away. Hence arise envy- ing of tliose who have a larger share of the good things of this life — strife with those who interfere in our enjoyments — impatience under restraint — and sorrow and repining when pleasure is abridged. And to this variety of turbulent passions, the natural fruits of the punish- ment of Adam's transgression, there are also to be added, all the fretfulness and disquietude occasioned by the diseases and pains which are inseparable from the condition of a mortal being. In this way the Arminians explain such expressions as these, " by one man's disobedience many were made sinners;" "all are under sin ;" "be- hold I was shapen in iniquity,"§ i. e. all men, in consequence of Adam's sin, are born in these circumstances, — under that disposition of events which subjects them to the dominion of passion, and exposes them to so many temptations, that it is impossible for any man to maintain Iris integrity. And hence, they say, arises the necessity of a Saviour, who, restoring to man the immortality which he had for- feited, may be said to have abolished death; Avho effectually delivers his followers from that bondage of mind, and that corruption of * Rom. V. 12, 17. 1 Cor. xv. 23. f Gen. v. 3. + I Cor. XV. 49. § Rom. v. 19; Hi. 9. Psal. li. 5. 400 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE character which are connected with the fear of death ; who, by his perfect obedience, obtains pardon for those sins into which they have been betrayed by their condition ; and by his Spirit enables them to overcome the temptations which hnman nature of itself cannot with- stand. According to this opinion, then, the human race has sutfered uni- versally in a very high degree by the sin of their first parent. At the same time, the manner of their suffering is analagous to many circum- stances in the ordinary dispensations of Providence ; for we often see children, by the negligence or fault of their parents, placed in situa- tions very unfavourable both to their prosperity and to their improve- ment ; and we can trace the profligacy of their character to the defects of their education, to the example set before them in their youth, and to the multiplied temptations in which, from a want of due attention on the part of others, they find themselves early entangled. All this is the same in kind with that account of the eflects of Adam's trans- gression which the Arminians give ; so that the second opinion is not attended with any difficulties peculiar to the Christian religion ; and did it exhaust the meaning of those passages of Scripture from which our knowledge of that transaction must be derived, we should be delivered from some of the most embarrassing questions in theology. But we must not be afraid of following the truth, because it might be easier to stop short before we arrive at it ; and therefore it is neces- sary for me to state, that this second opinion, however plausible, does not appear to give a complete account of all the circumstances, which both Scripture and experience direct us to take into view, when Ave speak of the effects which the sin of Adam produced upon his pos- terity ; and that the third opinion implies a great deal more. 3. As the third opinion, which forms the foundation of what is called the Calvinistic system, is delivered both in the articles of the church of England, and in the Confession of Faith of the church of Scotland, I shall give the amount of it in the words of t,he two churches. In the sixth chapter of the Confession of Faith, it is said, " our first parents, by their sin, fell from their original righteousness and com- munion with God, and so became dead in sin ; the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, are conveyed to all their posterity, de- scending from them by ordinary generation ; and from this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions." In like manner, it is said in the ninth article of the church of England, " Original sin standeth not in the following or imitation of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk,) but it is the fault or corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is en- gendered of the offspring of Adam, Avhereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil." This opinion is supported in all the Calvinistic systems of divinity by nearly the same arguments. But in stating the grounds of it, I shall take, as my principal guide, Mr. Edwards, formerly president of the college of New Jersey in America, who has written able treatises upon different branches of the Calvinistic system, and whose defence REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 401 of the doctrine of original sin contains the fullest and acutest answers that I have seen, to the objections commonly urged against that doctrine. The fundamental fact, upon which the third opinion rests, is this, that men in all countries and in all varieties of- situation are sinners ; by which it is not meant that all men are equally bad, or that every man commits every sin ; but the meaning is, that the whole history of mankind does not afford an instance of a perfect freedom from sin, either in any body of people, or even in any one individual. With- out looking back upon the universal prevalence of idolatry, and the enormities with which it was accompanied in the heathen world, even if we form our opinion of the human race from the appearances which it has exhibited in those lands that have been blessed with revelation, we shall find that a great part transgress the laws of God in a high degree, and in various respects ; that all the means employed to pre- vent or to correct wickedness prove ineflectual for their amendment ; and that in the obedience of the best, there are such defects as consti- tute them sinners. But the universal prevalence of sin, in all possible circumstances, and under every measure of advantage, is the decisive proof of a natural propensity to sin ; for we have no other method by which to judge of tendency or propensity, than by observing the same effect in every change of situation. It is from this kind of observation we say that heavy bodies have a tendency to fall ; that animals have certain instincts ; that individuals of the human race have characteristical propensities. In like manner, the propensity of the whole race to sin is gathered from the uniformity with which the race has sinned. If the effect arose merely from external circum- stances, without any natural propensity, it could not take place so steadily ; if the mind had no greater propensity to that which is evil than to that which is good, some circumstances must have occurred, in the infinite variety of events since the beginning of the world, fitted to prevent the appearance of the eftect altogether, by exhibiting the human race completely virtuous. But if men have always in one degree or other sinned, there must be something in their nature that indisposes them for their duty, which is the very thing meant by a corruption of nature. While we thus infer, from the universal practice of sin, that the nature of man is corrupt, we learn from Scripture that this is not the state in which Adam was created. Solomon gives us as the result of all his observations, Eccles. vii. 29, " Lo this only have I found, that God hath made man upright ; but they have sought out many inventions." The solemnity with which the remark is introduced, and the natural significancy of the words, lead us to consider Solo- mon as speaking of the very great difference between the crooked paths which men now pursue, and the state of uprightness in which the first man was made : and the remark, thus understood, is agree- able to what we may easily gather from laying diflerent passages to- gether. Thus, Gen. i. 31, man was made at the time, when "God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very good ;" and the formation of this part of the divine workmanship is express- ed in these peculiar words. Gen. i. 27, " So God created man in his own image, xar' sixom Qiov, ill the image of God created he him." The 36* 3 H 402 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE Socinians indeed interpret this expression as meaning nothing more than dominion ; man, they say, the lord of this lower world, is the image of God, the sovereign of the universe. But the words, as they are placed in Genesis, appear to imply something distinct from the dominion given to man, and antecedent to it ; and that they really express the character of his mind, is manifest from the references made to them in the New Testament, where the character, formed by the Spirit of God in all true Christians, is thus described, " The new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holi- ness,— which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him."* Any person who has studied the Old and the New Testament together, and who has marked the perfect consistency that runs through the whole language of Scripture, cannot entertain a doubt that Paul, who gives these descriptions, understood by Adam's being created in the image of God, his being created in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness. But Adam, who, in the day that God created him, was made in the likeness of God, is said, after he had transgressed the commandment of God, to have begotten a son in his own likeness after his image. Now this image of Adam, which all his posterity bear, is something very ditferent from the image of God in which he was made ; and it is not expressive merely of mortality, as the Arminians say, but it marks, as the image of God did, a character of mind. This is mani- fest from the' general strain of Scripture. For the Scriptures not only declare that all have sinned, but they seem to refer the abounding of iniquity to a cause antecedent to education, example, or the operation of particular circumstances ; and in numberless places they represent the nature of man as corrupt. Of this kind are the following : " The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth." " Behold I was shapen m iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." " The wicked are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies." " The heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead."t To these are to be joined from the Old Testament several very striking expressions in the book of Job, a book regarded as at least of equal antiquity with the books of Moses, and of the more weight in this argument, that the personages introduced into it do not discover any acquaintance with the Mosaic dispensation. Of this kind are the following : " Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? Not one." " What is man, that he should be clean ? and he which is born of a woman that he should be righteous ? Be- hold he putteth no trust in his saints ; yea the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, Avhich drinketh iniquity like water."| In the New Testament, the expres- sion of our Lord, John iii. 6, " That which is born of the flesh is flesh ;" and the words of his apostle, Rom. vii. 18, '• For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing ;" and all those pictures of the works of the flesh which abound in the epistles ap- • Epbes. iv. 24. Colos. iii. 10. ■\ Gen. viii. 21. Ps. li. 5 ; Iviii. 3. Eccles. ix. 3. t Job xiv. 4 ; xv. 14, 15, 16. EEMEDY IS PROVIPED. 403 pear to afford evidence that, throughout the New Testament, the natural state of eveiy man is represented as a state of depravity and aUenation from God. I have now given a general view of the train of argument which is employed to establish this fact, that human nature is corrupted by the fall of Adam. But after the fact is established, there remain various questions with regard to the manner of the fact, which have been agitated with much heat, and with very little edification. The church of Rome consider that universal propensity to evil of which we have been speaking, and to which they give the name of co7icupiscentia, as the natural state of man, /. e. the state in which he was created. This propensity wag, in Adam, under the restraint of that superior divine principle which he derived from communion with God ; and in this restraint consisted his uprightness. When the superior principle was, inconsequence of his transgression, withdrawn from him and his posterity, the propensity remained. But, being the nature of man, it is not in itself sinful, and becomes sin only when it is carried forth into action ; as it is said, James i. 15, " Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin." In answer to this system, it has been justly argued, that the disorders of the passions are in themselves strong indications of depravity ; that they are opposite to the spiritual and refined morality of the gospel, which requires purity of heart ; that concupiscentia, in several places of the New Testa- ment, particularly in the Epistle to the Romans, chap. vii. is spoken of as sin, and that James means that lust, which is sinful while it dwells in the heart, when it hath conceived, brings forth sinful actions. An opinion, diametrically opposite to this system of the church of Rome, was broached in the last century by Flaccus lUyricus, an obscure divine, that original sin is the very substance of human nature, a being operating and existing in all men. This opinion is justly regarded as monstrous, even by those who hold the corruption of human nature in its greatest extent ; and it would not have found a place in this general view of opinions concerning original sin, if the mention of it did not assist you in apprehending the true system of the Calvinists upon this point. They consider the corruption of human nature, not as a substance, but as a defect or perversion of its qualities, by which they are deprived of their original perfection ; and applying to this corruption various expressions in which the Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, describes the state of the heathen world before Christianity appeared, they consider the natural state of man as a state in which the understanding is darkened, the heart alienated from the life of God, the affections set upon earthly things, and all the powers of the mind emploA^ed in fulfilling the desires of the flesh. This state is called by the apostle " being dead in trespasses and sins ;" an expression which, when taken in conjunc- tion with the threatening to Adam, " in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt sm-ely die," has suggested what divines call spiritual death. This denotes an estrangement from God. the fountain of life, and an inability in man to return to God ; and being consider- ed as extending from Adam through liis posterity, it is. in the highest sense, the corruption of the nature of a creature, who was made after the image of God. 404 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE This account of the corruption of human nature does not imply- that man has lost the natural capacity of knowing God, or the natural sense of the distinction between right and wrong. The same powers of reason by which he conducts the business of life, or makes discoveries in science, lead him to infer, from the works of creation, the existence and the perfections of the Deity ; and those moral senti- ments, upon which all the intercourse of society and the principles of legislation proceed, dictate to him that conduct which, as an indivi- dual, he ought to observe. Accordingly, the apostle to the Romans, at the very time he is proving the universal corruption of human nature, says that heathen idolatry was inexcusable, because the invisible things of God may be understood by the things which he hath made ; and further, that the Gentiles, who have not the law, i. e. any written law, are a law unto themselves.* Man, therefore, is not, according to the third opinion, so far degraded by the corruption of his nature as to cease to be a moral agent. In every situation he appears capable of the sentiment of religion ; in every country, and under every form of society, his heart has glowed with the feelings of private affection and tenderness ; and the history of his exploits has been ennobled by many disinterested and heroic exertions. But, without any invidious detraction from those amiable dispositions and those splendid actions, which constitute the principal charm of the ancient poets and historians, it will occur to you that they were either wholly unconnected with principles of religion, or that they were accompanied with superstition so gross and childish, as not in reality to contradict that system, which places the corruption of human nature in an estrangement from the true God. Amidst all the offices of private kindness or of public spirit which we have been accustom- ed to admire, men were without God in the world ; and there does not appear, from the full experiment which was made under the philosophy and government of ancient times, the smallest probability that any improvement of the understanding which they could pro- duce, or any refinement of the heart which they could form, would have recovered man from what is termed the spiritual death of the soul, so as to bring him back to the fountain of life, and restore that communion with God, and that image of God, which are essential to the rectitude of his nature. After ascertaining what is meant, according to the third opinion, by the corruption of human nature, it has been inquired in what manner this corruption is transmitted, how it comes about that the powers of our nature inherit from Adam this defect and perversion. But this is an inquiry in which it is impossible to attain any satisfying conclu- sion, because it resolves into principles of which we are totally ignorant. We infer, from various appearances, that besides the body which is obvious to our senses, and the growth of which may be traced from the time of its conception, every human being has a principle distinct from matter, which we call the soul. But we know not enough of the nature of the soul to form any judgment with regard to the manner of its connexion with the body, or the kind of influence which the one exerts over the other. If we say with some * Rom. i. ii. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 405 sects of Christians animam esse ex traduce, that the soul is generated like the body by the act of the parents, we seem to approach to materialism. If we say, as the Calvinists generally do, that souls are successively made by the Creator, and joined by his act to those bodies which they are to animate, we seem to form a rational hypo- thesis. But having never been admitted to the secret counsels of the Father of Spirits, we find this act of his in many points to us inex- plicable. Here are two substances, not only of a different nature, but, according to this hypothesis, of a different origin, most intimately joined. We feel daily the effects of their junction. Yet we cannot pretend to assign the period when it commenced, the reasons which determined the Creator to join a soul to one body rather than to another, or the bond which keeps together that soul and body which he chose to unite. These are questions which reason does not resolve, and upon which revelation does not profess to throw any light. They meet us upon many subjects in natural religion, and they recur when we attempt to speculate concerning the manner in which the corruption of human nature is transmitted. But in revela- tion, as in natural religion, they are questions concerning the manner of the fact, not concerning the fact itself; and, therefore, if the Scrip- tures reveal, or if experience assures us, that this corruption is trans- mitted, the questions which may be started, and which cannot be answered, are of no more weight to shake the evidence of this fact, than questions of the same kind are to shake the evidence of the union of soul and body. We cannot doubt, from our acquaintance with the government of God, that if the Creator infuses a soul into a body, either at the time of the conception of the body, or at any subsequent period, he acts according to a general course which is established with wisdom ; and it appears from our experience to be part of this course, that the likeness of children to their parents extends beyond the features of their body. There are not only constitutional diseases, but constitutional vices ; there is a character which often runs through a family for many generations ; and there are numberless instances where the resemblance cannot be explained by imitation. The same Scriptures, from Avhich we infer that a general corruption pervades the posterity of Adam, intimate that it is transmitted by natural generation, that is to say, that the constitution of which we observe many particular instances extends to this universal fact. But they leave the transmission of this corruption upon the same footing, and in the same darkness, with the propagation of the soul ; and their silence is sufficient to check the speculations of every sober inquirer. This third opinion concerning the effects of the sin of Adam is supported by many passages in Scripture; it appears to have been, the received opinion of the Jewish church ; and some traditions of it having probably reached the heathen philosophers, and coming in aid of the conclusions that might be drawn from universal experience, may have led Socrates to speak oixaxov t^^vtov, a phrase equivalent to what we call natural corruption ; and Plato to ascribe the causes of our vices to those first principles which we inherit from our parents. But there yet remains a fourth opinion upon this subject. 4. It is held by many divines, it is part of the creed of the church 406 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE of Scotland, and it seems to be implied in the language of the arti- cles of the church of England, although it is not there directly ex- pressed, that the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity ; and that by means of this imputatron, all who are descended from iiim are guilty before God. The opinion of those who hold the imputation of the sin of Adam includes the truth of the third opinion ; but they hold something more ; and you will understand in what respect the fourth opinion goes beyond the third, by attending to the meaning of two terms which are of fi'equent use amongst those who write upon original sin, the mediate and immediate imputation of the sin of Adam. The corruption which we derive from Adam has been styled the mediate imputation of liis sin ; it becomes ours only in conse- quence of our connexion with him, but it is truly ours because it in- fects our nature. Now those who hold the fourth opinion say, that besides this corruption of nature, although always in conjunction with it, there is an immediate imputation, by which the sin of Adam is counted in the sight of God as ours. Accordingly, you will find the third and fourth opinion joined in the sixth chapter of our Confession of Faith, as forming together the complete view of the effects of Adam's sin. '*' They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same deatli in sin and corrupted nature con- veyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary gene- ration." The reasoning, upon which this fourth opinion has been grounded, is of the following kind. In those transactions which took place soon after the creation, Adam appears as the representative of the human race. The first blessing, " be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it," both by the terms in which it is conceived, and by the nature of the thing, was not a personal blessing, but, although addressed to Adam and Eve, conveyed to their posterity, as well as to themselves, a right to occupy the earth, to rule over the inferior animals, and to employ their service. Had the penalty annexed to disobedience, " in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," been executed as instantly as the words might have led Adam to ex- pect, he could not have had any posterity. It was the delaying the execution of this part of the sentence which left time for the appear- ance of the human race upon earth ; but in consequence of the sin of their first parents, they come into the world subject to death ; and the calamities in their persons, which mankind continually expe- rience, are the daily execution of the former parts of the sentence pronounced upon Adam. The ground is cursed to them for his sake; and even if we admit the ingenious theory which Bishop Sherlock has ably supported, that part of the curse upon the ground was re- mitted by the blessing pronounced upon Noah after the flood, we must acknowledge that the full extent of that curse had been felt by all the inhabitants of the earth for many generations. Here then are unquestionably the effects of the sin of Adam reaching to his poste- rity ; in other words, it is counted to them in the judgment of God as if it were their own ; so that Adam in this sin, as well as in the other transactions between the Creator and our first parents, appears not as an individual, but as being what divines call a federal head, who, in the covenant that was made with him, acted for his posterity. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 407 These views, suggested by the consequences of the transaction be- fore the fall, are considered as implied in an expression, Ephes. ii. 3, fvju iixva op.r;i; and they are very much confirmed by the reasoning of the Apostle Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, chap. v. The apostle had proved largely, in the beginning of that epistle, the uni- versal sinfulness of mankind. From thence, he had proceeded to dis- course of the richness of that grace by which sinners are justified, i. e. brought into a state of favour and reconciliation ; and in reference to what he had said of the manner of this justification, he thus expresses himself, Rom. v. 11, " we joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the atonement." At this point, he looks back upon the two subjects which he had discussed, and with the comprehension and rapidity of thought which distinguish the writings of Paul, he brings forward to the view of the Romans a striking simi- larity between the two subjects. The similarity is this, that both sin, and the remedy of sin, were introduced through one man. By Jesus we have received the atonement : by one man sin entered into the world. This similarity in two things diametrically opposite was of itself worthy of attention. But the apostle had a particular reason for bringing it forward and dwelling upon it, which we may gather from the preceding part of the epistle. The great distinction of man- kind in those times was into Jew and Gentile. Accordingly, the apostle, when he v/as proving the sinfulness of mankind, found it necessary to show that the Jews in this respect had no advantage above the Gentiles, and rendered his proposition, in the apprehension of those to whom he wrote, completely universal, by concluding both Jews and Gentiles under sin. But there could not be a more effectual way of confirming the universality of this his fundamental proposi- tion, than by recurring to the similarity which he is now going to state. For, in stating this similarity, he draws the attention of his readers from Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, of whom they boasted, and through whom they inherited many blessings, to a more remote ancestor, from whom both Jews and Gentiles were descended, and through whom both inherited the same dismal legacy. In ascending to Adam the distinction between Jews and Gentiles is lost, and the necessity of a Saviour is laid in that condition which is common to all mankind. This account of the occasion of introducing the discourse, which we are about to consider, explains the meaning of the two words Bia -tovto, with which the twelfth verse begins. A'* rovto li^rtf^ 81 £>oj avO^iiitov ri ajMi^tia fij ■tov xoaixov ({.arfkOi, xat, 5ta t'j;? ajwa^t'ias o ^va-toit xa.i oiifco; ft? navto-i av^gcortouj o ^aratoj 5tj;X9£i', tij)' 9 rtavT'Ej ^.ua^T'oi'. Tovto doeS UOt refer tO any particular word in the preceding verse, but to the whole of what the apostle had said in the former part of the epistle. " This being the view which I have given of the sinfulness of mankind and of their deliverance, you will perceive that similarity between the two which I am now to state." ' O-ime, gives notice that the similarity is to be stated ; but the reddition of it, or tl:e other subject similar to that mentioned in the twelfth verse, is not formally enunciated till the eighteenth. The intervening verses, after the manner of Paul, are filled up with illustrations of the first subject, or with the mention of points of dissimilitude between the two, before the point in which 408 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE they are similar is clearly expressed. The first three clauses of the twelfth verse have already occurred in speaking of the effects of Adam's sin, and they are not attended with any peculiar difficulty. But the last clause of this verse, e^' 9 fio-vtc; t;ixa^top, admits of three different interpretations, and the nature of its connection with the rest of the verse appears to vary according to the interpretation which is adopted. It has been rendered, "in whom, viz. the first man, all sinned" — " unto which, viz. death, all sinned" — " inasmuch as, viz. for this which is, all sinned." The first does not really express more than may be gathered from the apostle's argument, and therefore the sense is no reason for rejecting it. But it will occur to you, that according to this interpretation, the antecedent, avO^ccnov, is very re- mote, and that several masculine words have intervened. The second refers the relative to the nearest antecedent ^amtoi, and -marks truly the effect or consequence of sin, but it marks that eflect by an expression harsh and obscure. The third renders ^t' 9 in a manner agreeable to the analogy of the Greek language, and the use of this phrase in classical writers. But it would have been more accurate to have rendered w^C^'o"' " did sin," than " have sinned;" and if our translation be read with this small correction, " forasmuch as, or upon this account which is, all did sin," the last clause of the twelfth verse, in which the apostle is still stating the first subject, will appear to be perfectly equivalent to the first clause of the nineteenth verse, wliere the same subject is repeated. " All were constituted siimers by the act of this one man." The reason of this assertion is given in the thirteenth verse. " For before the law of Moses was given, sin was in the world." I need not refer to the book of Genesis for the sins of that period, which are there related : for none will be disposed to deny that sin was in the world, i. e. was universally practised, before the children of Israel went out of Egypt ; and yet whatever the actions of men in that period had been, they could not have been counted to them as sins, had there been no law ; since, according to an axiom often repeated by the apostle, " where no law is, there is no transgression." But the apostle had clearly proved, in the first and second chapters of the epistle, that men never were left without a law, because " the invisible things of God from the creation of the Avorld, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made," and " the nations who have not the law, are a law unto themselves." There is a primary universal rule of righteousness written on the heart of man, under which every man is born, by which every man, although he has no other revelation of the divine will, knows that he shall be judged, and every transgression of which is felt to be worthy of death. Had there been no such law, sin could not have been attended with its penal consequence, i. e. death. The word a?i^a, in the fourteenth verse, gives notice of an objection which the apostle is aware might occur to his doctrine in the thirteenth, but which he purposely brings forward, because it is the strongest confirmation of his capital position, that sin and death entered into the world by one man. The objection is, that sin appeared by its penal effect, death, in the interval between Adam and Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's trans- gression. It is not obvious who are the persons here meant, and REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 409 different interpretations have been given. It appears plain to me, that the apostle cannot mean, as some say, those who had not sinned like Adam, with the punishment of death before their eyes ; because the apostle had expressly said, Rom. i. 32, " That the heathen, who were filled with all unrighteousness, knew the judgment of God, and they who commit such things are worthy of death." Besides, it is not pertinent to his argument to say here, that any who sinned, in the interval between Adam and Moses, sinned without knowing, as Adam did, that death is the punishment of sin. For his argument is this ; sin cannot be counted to a person, so as to be punished in him, without a law : but sin was punished before the law of Moses existed ; the consequence is, that there must be some law antecedent to the law of Moses, and more universal, viz. the law of works given to the first parent of mankind, and extending to all his posterity. Every one that commits sin, therefore, sins after the similitude of Adam's transgression, in this respect, that he sins against the law of his Crea- tor, knowing that he deserves death. But who then are they that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, and yet death reigns over them ? They can be none other than infants, the persons of whom this clause is generally understood ; that large proportion of the human race who die before their faculties are so far unfolded, that they are capable of committing any sin. They die in consequence of the law given to their first parent, by which death is declared to be the punishment of sin, and their dying is a proof that his sin is counted to them as theirs. The mention of this striking fact leads the apostle to style Adam -ivTio^ tov ntVKovtou an image or represen- tation of him that was to come, of Christ, the person by whom the deliverance was to be brought. But he does not formallj'- state the similarity between the two, until he has touched upon the points of dissimilitude. These are stated in the 15th, 16th, and 17th verses; and the amount of them is this: the value of the gift tran- scends the extent of the forfeiture, and the grace manifested in the gift goes far beyond every appearance of severity in the condemna- tion. I will not arrest your attention upon these points of dissimili- tude now, because they will occur more properly when we come to speak of the remedy. From the mention of them, the apostle passes on to state explicitly, in verses IS, 19, the similarity between the method in which sin and death were introduced into the world, and the method of our deliverance. The particles a^aow give notice that he is continuing his discourse, and that he is collecting the former parts of it in approaching to his conclusion. The similarity is this. As by one offence all men are under the condemnation of death, as by the disobedience of one man many were constituted in the sight of God sinners, so by one righteousness, all men obtain the justifica- tion of life, and by the obedience of one many shall be constituted in the sight of God righteous. The offence of one is counted to us in such a manner that we suffer the punishment of sin, which a just God would not inflict upon us if we were not considered by him as sinners ; the obedience of one is counted to us in such a manner, that we who were sinners are upon account of it justified, i. e. considered as righteous by a just God, and received into his favour. This whole reasoning of the apostle favours the notion of an im- 37 3 1 410 ^ DISEASE FOR WHICH THE putation of Adam's sin. The phrase indeed does not occur ; but the thing meant by the phrase appears to be the natural meaning of the passage ; and I know no better way in which you can satisfy your- selves that it is the true meaning, tiian by comparing the interpreta- tion now given, with the forced paraphrases to which those are obUged to have recourse, who wish to show that the fourth opinion does not receive any countenance from the authority of Paul. Upon these two grounds, our daily experience that the effects of Adam's sin yet subsist in the world, and the manner in which the apostle reasons from this fact, that all die, there has been founded that notion, which, from the religious education commonly received in this country, is familiar to your minds, that there was at the begin- ning of the world a covenant in v/hich Adam acted as the represent- ative of his posterity. It is generally said, in support of this notion, that Adam had every possible advantage for keeping the covenant, and no reasonable temptation to break it, so that human virtue could not have had a fairer trial ; that human affairs could not proceed un- less parents acted for their children, and rulers for their subjects ; and that we are accustomed to behold not only many instances in which individuals suffer for the faults of those who went before' them, but also many kinds of civil contracts, that include posterity in transac- tions, which, although they had no opportunity of giving their con- sent to them, are considered, in the eye of the law, as theirs. It is further said, that our usages and ideas with regard to such transac- tions occur often in the Old Testament, where the Almighty con- descends to represent that act of sovereignty, by which he chose the posterity of Abraham, as a covenant made with their ancestor, and the law given by Moses as a covenant made with the Israelites in the wilderness, not for themselves only, but for their posterity ;* a covenant which both conveyed blessings to the descendants of those with whom it was made, and also laid them under many restraints ; and a covenant constituted in this manner, that succeeding generations endured many calamities, and the Jews at this day are continuing to suffer, for the sins of their fathers. If is true indeed that we are not warranted to consider this part of the constitution of that covenant which was made with the Israel- ites, as in all respects a specimen of the general plan of the divine administration, because this constitution extended only to the temporal affairs of the Jewish nation. And yet, when we are told by that apostle, from whose writings our knowledge of the new dispensation is chiefly derived, that those who have committed no sin sutler death, which entered into the world by the sin of the first Adam, it is im- possible for us to avoid concluding, that as there was a particular constitution for the Jewish state, in which the iniquities of the fathers were visited upon the children, there may be an universal constitution for the human race, by which the sin of their first parent extends to all his offspring. It is readily admitted that difficulties appear to us to attend this constitution. But difficulties of the same kind are perpetually occur- ring upon subjects in theology, not peculiar to this system, but nearly * Deut. xxix. 10—15. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 411 the same, in whatever manner we- attempt to accomit for the origin of evil : and the same account may be given of all of them. We see only in parts ; but we are not qualified to judge of the ways of God without seeing the whole, because his administration embraces the whole. There may be a deptli of wisdom in the constitution of which we are now speaking, that we are unable to penetrate : there may be advantages resulting from it to the human race, that infinitely counter- balance the evils to which it gives occasion. That it is not unbecoming the Ruler of the universe, appears with the clearest evidence from hence, that a constitution of the same kind, with regard to some par- ticulars, may be observed in the ordinary course of his providence towards all men, and in the whole history of that people, of whom he condescended to appear as the immediate Governor. Although it may appear to you from what lias been said, that we are warranted to employ the notion of a covenant, when we speak of the manner in which the sin of Adam is huputed to his posterity, it is proper to warn you that there is a danger of falling into very great improprieties both in language and in sentiment, by pushing the analogy too far, and that you must not be surprised if all the explica- tions oi' this subject appear to you unsatisfactory. When you read that Adam is the root, and that, as in the communication of the juices of a tree, the guilt is necessarily conveyed from the root to all the branches ; — that Adam and his posterity constitute one moral person ; — that the whole human race was, at the beginning, one mass acting by its head ; — and that all the hidividuals of that mass consented to his act, because they were in him, from whom they afterwards pro- ceeded,— you will probably feel, as I did, that they are repugnant to that distinct agency, which enters into our notion of accountable beings, as essential to that character. But you will remember that those who say such things attempt to explain what they do not under- stand ; and you will learn, by their failure, that it is wiser to refrain from such attempts, and to rest in what the Scriptures teach with regard to the imputation of Adam's sin, which may be summed up in a few words. The effects of the sin of Adam reach to his posterity 1 1 in such a manner, that they suffer death, which is declared in Scrip- | ture to be the wages of sin, as if his sin had been committed by them, f The Scriptures, in stating the effects of Adam's sin make no distinc- tion between that death which his posterity visibly suffer, and that eternal destruction which is often called by the name of death ; and therefore we are not warranted to say that the dissolution of soul and body is tlie only effect of Adam's sin, which extends to his posterity. In what manner the mercy of God will dispose hereafter of those infants who die in consequence of Adam's sin, without having done any evil, the Scriptures have not declared ; and it does not become us to say more than is said in the excellent words of our Confession of Faith : " Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who workedi wlien and where, and how he pleaseth."* With regard to those that are grown up, the corruption of nature mherited from Adam, in consequence of which they daily commit sins of their own, is jomed with the imputation of * Confession of Faith, x. 3. 412 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE REMEDY IS PROVIDED. his sin ; and when we think of their situation, we ought not to allow ourselves, even in imagination, to separate the two. Tiie amount of all that has been said concerning that situation for which the Gospel brings a remedy is this. Those who consider the Scriptures as declaring that the whole human race are both guilty and depraved before God perceive, in this picture, the absolute neces- sity of a remedy. But even those who do not admit the truth of this picture acknowledge, without hesitation, that men are sinners. They differ in opinion from the former with regard to the malignity of sin, the manner in which it was introduced into the world, and the nature of that constitution under which the guilt and misery of it are trans- mitted ; and hence they entertain different apprehensions with regard to the nature and extent of the remedy, and the manner in which it is applied to the soul. But as the words of the apostle, " All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God," are subscribed by every Christian, the fundamental proposition upon which the Gospel rests is universally assented to ; and from this proposition we now proceed to examine the different opinions concerning the remedy. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 413 CHAPTER II. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY. As Christians of all denominations admit that men have sinned, they admit also that the Gospel is a remedy for the present state of moral evil. They readily adopt that "faithful saying," which the apostle Paul declares to be « worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." They adore the love of the Father in sending the Son upon this errand. They profess the warmest gratitude to him " who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity." They acknowledge that the greatest benefits are derived to the world by his sufferings ; that we " have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sms ;" and that by what he did and underwent for our sakes, he is entitled to be honoured as the Savioiu, the Deliverer, and the Redeemer of man- kind. , • , 1, 1 But under this uniformity in the language which all who receive the Scriptures are constrained to use, there is concealed much diversity of opinion ; and the nature of that remedy, which it is the character of the Gospel to have brought, is one of the subjects in their specula- tions upon which Christians have departed very far from one another. —The opposite systems are supported partly by general reasonings, and partly by passages of Scripture. The general reasonings are by no means of equal weight upon all sides. But it is possible for able men to reason so plausibly in support of any of the opinions which have been held upon this subject, that the mind might remain in sus- pense, if the general language of Scripture, when fairly interpreted, did not appear decidedly to favour one of the systems ; so that the question concerning the nature of the remedy, like those which we Lately discussed concerning the character and dignity of the persons revealed in the Gospel, must be ultimately determined by sound Scripture criticism. There are three systems with regard to the nature of the remedy, to which we may be able afterwards to affix more significant names from the leading features by which they are distinguished, but which it may suffice at present to mark by calling them the Sociman, the JMiddle, and the Catholic opinions. By calling the first the Sociman, I do not mean that it was held by Spcinus himself, for his opinion Avent a great deal farther ; but it is the opinion held by those who now call themselves Socinians, and it is the simplest system that can be formed with regard to the nature of the remedy. I call the third the Catholic opmion, because it has been generally held in the Chns- 37* 414 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE tian church since the days of theapostles, and enters into the creed of almost every estabUshed church in Christendom. What I call the Middle opinion arose in the course of the last century out of a part of the system of Socinus. It is disavowed by the modern Socinians ; but it has been brought forward by some very able divines both in the church of England, and amongst the dissenters, as the best method of steering clear of the objections that have been made either to the Socinian or to the Catholic system. I think it of importance to give a fair and complete exhibition of every one of these three systems ; and the order of stating them, which appears to be dictated by their nature, is to begin with the Socinian, which is the simplest ; to proceed to the middle, which professes to be an improvement upon the Socinian ; and to end with the Catholic, which, if it is the truth, will bear the disadvantage arising from the previous exhibition of two systems that are founded upon objections to it, and will approve itself to the understanding to be agreeable both to reason and to Scripture. Section I. The fundamental principle of the Socinian system is this. Pure goodness, or a desire to communicate happiness, is conceived by the Socinians to constitute the whole character of the Deity. All the moral attributes of the divine nature are regarded as only modifica- tions of benevolence, and it is believed that nothing either exists in God, or forms a part of his government, which may not be resolved into this principle. Infinitely blessed in himself, he could have no reason for creating the human race but to make them happy. His wisdom discerns the best means of communicating happiness ; his power carries these means readily and certainly into effect ; and although the means vary according to circumstances, the benevolent purpose from which they proceed is always the same. He hates sin, because it makes his creatures unhappy ; he forbids it, that his authority may deter them from doing what is hurtful to themselves ; he punishes it, that the experience of sufiering may convince them of their error. He employs various means for their reformation ; he bears patiently with their obstinacy and heedlessness; and at what time soever the recollection of his prohibition, the suffering of evil, or any other circumstance, brings back to their duty those who have sinned, that goodness of the Deity, which had been exercised under the form of long-suffering during their error, becomes compassion and clemency ; he receives his returning children into his favour ; and without regard to any external circumstance; or any other being, freely forgives their sins. The supreme ruler of the universe, say the Socinians, in thus freely forgiving all sins merely upon the re- pentance of the sinner, does injury to none. He only remits a part of his own right, a debt which his offending creatures have contracted to him. The independent felicity of his nature suffers no diminution from his not exacting all that he might claim ; the glory of his good- ness is illustrated by tlie happiness which the pardon conveys to the NATURE OF THE REMEDV. 415 penitent ; and in conferring this pardon freely without any considera- tion foreign to himself, he sets his creatures an example of generosity in forgiving those otfcnces, which they are daily commiting against one another. Tills fundamental principle of the Socinian opinion, which seems at first sight to flow from the infinite perfection of the divine nature, and to be most honourable to the Creator and Fatlier of all, is sup- ported by numberless passages of Scripture, which magnify the free grace of God in the pardon of transgressors, which invite them to return, which describe the readiness with which they shall be received, and the joy that there is in heaven over a sinner that repenteth. It is supported by the many instances in which we experience the forbearance of God, that long-suffering which spares us amidst repeated provocations, and leads us by unmerited blessings to repentance. It is supported by all those candid and indulgent sentiments, which dispose us to forget the offences of persons in whom we discover a change of mind, and particularly by parental afiection, which, instead of being worn out by the waywardness and perverse- ncss of children, is impatient to embrace them on the first symptoms of a return to obedience. It can easily be conceived that the argu- ments, of which I have given a short sketch, are capable of receiving much embellishment, and that eloquent men, by fixing the attention upon a particular view of the subject, may leave little doubt in the minds of ordinary readers, that a theory concerning the nature of the remedy offered in the gospel, resting upon this prhiciple as its basis, contains the whole of the truth. When this principle is applied in forming such a theory, it follows obviously from the principle, that the person who brought the remedy had nothing to do in order to procure the pardon of those who repent. That is freely and purely the effect of the divine goodness. But the circumstances of the world might render it expedient that a declara- tion of pardon should be made. For if men have been sinners from the beginning of the world, as the Socinians do not deny, if the religion of the heathen Avas connected with much superstition, i. e. with a blind excessive fear of the deity ; and if the Jewish religion appointed a costly burdensome method of approaching the God of Israel, which could not be observed by all the nations of the earth, there seems to be much occasion that a religion not confined to a particular tribe, but professing to spread itself over the whole world, and appointing a spiritual worship, should declare, hi the most unequivocal and solemn manner, that encouragement to the penitent which is derived from the essential goodness of God. Now such declarations are known to abound in the gospel : and they appear to the Socinians to give the religion of Jesus that importance which every one expects to find in a divine revelation. God appears there in Christ reconciling the world to himself, and repentance and remission of sins are preached in the name of Christ among all nations ; not that God is more gracious than he was at any former time ; not that Christ did any thing to render God propitious : but he is the messenger who publishes the divine grace. His first words were, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand ;" his own discourses represent God as merciful ; his apostles, after his ascension, preached the fprgiveness of sins, 416 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE saying, " Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," and his whole religion is a standing declaration of this proposi- tion, which was always equally true, but the truth of which was not at all times perfectly understood, that "whosoever confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall have mercy." This proposition, say the Socinians, approves itself by intrinsic evidence to a philosophical mind. But, in order to rouse the atten- tion of the multitude, the person employed by God to publish it to the world was rendered respectable in their eyes by many mighty works. The miracles, which the power of God enabled the messen- ger of this grace to perform, were the credentials of a divine com- mission ; and a splendor was thrown around his character by the other purposes which his appearance accomplished. One of these additional purposes was his being the instructor of the world, who not only restored, by the declaration which he was commissioned to make, the natural confidence that men ought to have in the goodness of their Creator, but also taught them the will of God. As the Socinians do not admit that the first man possessed more knowledge and righteousness than any of his posterity, their princi- ples lead them to deny those remains of the image of God which other Christians trace, to detract very much from the authority of the law of nature, and to resolve all religious knowledge into the tradi- tion of some primary revelation. This tradition could not fail to be obscured and corrupted in the progress of ages ; and as gross igno- rance of the duties of men is known to have overspread the earth, it is manifest that there was much need of the perfect teaching of a man, whose miracles were both a security that he ta,ught the will of God truly, and a call upon men to listen to him. In this opinion of the usefulness of Christianity, all who receive it as a divine revelation readily agree. But the Socinians, as if desirous to atone by this branch of their encomium upon Christianity, for the dishonour which other parts of their system are conceived to do to that religion, go far beyond other Christians in magnifying the importance of the gospel as a method of instruction. They represent its precepts as not only simple, clear, and authoritative, but as inculcating virtues which are neither explicitly taught in the law of Moses, nor deducible from any of its principles ; and they allow the messenger of the grace of God all the honour which can accrue to his character and to his religion from the essential superiority of his precepts. In delivering to a world full of superstition and vice, precepts so opposite to their maxims and manners, the messenger of the grace of God encountered much opposition ; he provoked the civil and eccle- siastical rulers — he alarmed the evil passions that he endeavoured to restrain — and after a life marked with uncommon difficulties and un- merited persecution, he was put to death by the violence of his ene- mies. His death is considered by the Socinians as the unavoidable result of the circumstances in which he published his excellent reli- gion ; an event happening without any special appointment of hea- ven, according to the course of human aflairs ; for having persevered during a life of suffering in bearing witness to the truth, and behig incapable of retracting, even in the immediate prospect of death, like other martvrs he sealed his declaration with his blood. The death J!fATURE OF THE REMEDY. 417 of Christ, even althongli regarded merely as a natural event, is full of instruction to liis followers. The innocence of the illustrious suf- ferer was made conspicuous by all the circumstances which attended his trial ; the patience, the magnanimity, the piety and benevolence which marked the hour of his sufferings, imprint upon those who cherish his memory with affection, all the lessons of his religion ; and having taught men the will of God while he lived, he suffered for their benefit, " leaving them an example that they should follow his steps/' But the example exhibited in his sufferings, and the testimony which he bore by them to all that he had said during his life, are not the only benefits of the death of Christ which the modern Socinians admit. They say also, that it confirmed the truth of the promises of God ; for his death was necessary in order to his resurrection, and his resurrection not only completes the evidences of his mission, but is the earnest to mankind of life and immortality, that great blessing which he was commissioned to promise. It is this further purpose of the death of Christ which completes the Socinian scheme of Chris- tianity ; and therefore, in order to render the view which I am now giving a fair exposition of that scheme, it is necessary to state the peculiar importance which it affixes to this purpose. Not admitting any forfeiture to have been incurred by the trans- gression of Adam, the Socinians consider man as mortal, a creature who would have died whether he had sinned or not. Dr. Priestley goes farther upon this subject than some of those who adopt his other principles have yet been able to follow him. He holds that the dis- tinction between soul and body is a popular error, derived from hea- then philosophy, but contradicted by reason and Scripture ; that man is a homogeneous being, i. e. that the powers of thought and sensa- tion belong to the brain, as much as gravity and magnetism belong to other arrangements of matter ; and that the whole machine, whose complicated motions had presented the appearance of animal and rational life, is dissolved at death. To Dr. Priestley, therefore, the resurrection promised in the gospel is the highest possible gift, be- cause, according to his system, it is the restoration of existence. But even those Socinians, who do not so far depart from the conclusions of sound philosophy as to believe that the phenomena of thought can be explained without supposing an immaterial principle in man, while they allow that this principle may survive the body, are inclined to compare the state in which it is left, after the dissolution of the body, to a kind of sleep, in which all the faculties of the soul con- tinue suspended till the resurrection. Being led, by their system concerning the fall, to infer from the present appearance of death, that it is part of the original constitution of nature, and finding no reason- ing in favour of a future state amongst those who had not the benefit of revelation, so clear and decisive as to satisfy a speculative mind, and no explicit promise in the law of Moses,. they consider immor- taUty as a free gift which the Almighty may have bestowed upon those who died in ancient times, but a gift, the assurance of which is conveyed to the human race solely by the religion of Christ. Here, therefore, the Socinians place the great value and importance of the 3 K 418 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE gospel. Whether man consists of spirit and body united in an inex- plicable manner, or whether his whole frame be only an organization of matter more exquisite than any which he beholds, he cannot infer with certainty from any deductions of his own reason, that he shall survive that event, which, happening in the established course of na- ture, puts an end to all his labours and enjoyments upon earth. But the gospel brings life and immortality to light. While it declares that the God who made man is ready to forgive all his wanderings, and to receive him into favour upon his repentance, it promises to reward the obedience and virtues of this short life, by raising him from the sleep of death, by restoring to him at the resurrection, whatever had been his state in the intervening period, all those capacities which death seemed to have annihilated, and by introducing him to a life of endless and complete bliss. This promise corresponds with that essential goodness of the Deity from which the declaration of pardon flows; but it is infinitely beyond the deserts of a frail sinful creature: and, therefore, that it may take possession of the mind of man, that he may rest without hesitation in the certainty of the gift, and that he may derive all the comfort and improvement which the prospect is fitted to administer, it is necessary that every confirmation of the promise, every sensible proof which the nature of the case admits, should be given him. Now this sensi- ble proof is afforded by means of the death of Jesus Christ ; and hence the great advantage which the world derives from that fact. A man, say the Socinians, not distinguished from his brethren in his origin or in the powers of his nature, having been employed by God to teach his will and to declare the promise of pardon and life eternal to those who repent, is exposed, in the execution of this commission, to sufferings more severe than those which fall to the lot of ordinary men ; he endures them with patience, and the virtues of his character are illustrated by his sorrows. But instead of being enabled to sur- mount them, he is delivered by God into the hands of his enemies, that being put to d^ath by their malice, he might be raised by the power of the Creator. In three days he returns from the grave ; and the evidence of his resurrection is so remarkably circumstantial, that there is not, perhaps, says Dr. Priestley, any fact in ancient history so perfectly credible according to the estabHshed rules of evidence. But the resurrection of the man, who promised in the name of God that, at the last day, all shall rise, is a demonstration in his person that a general resurrection is possible ; it is an assurance from God of the fulfilment of the promise, the most level to the apprehensions of the generality of mankind, and it is connected with that glorious reward upon which the Scriptures say this man has already entered. For, whatever may be the state of other men till the general resurrection, we are told that this man has ascended to heaven, and is now invested with supreme dignity and bliss. His recompense is held forth in Scripture as the encouragement and the security to his disciples that they shall in due time receive theirs ; and the encouragement and security are founded upon this circumstance, that he was a man like them, who suffered and died. So speak the apostles ; "if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus NATURE OP THE REMEDY. 419 will God bring with him."* "Every man in his own order; Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's."! And our Lord himself said to his apostles, " Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations; and I appoint unto you a kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me. "J Socinus and his immediate followers admitted that power of Christ in dispensing the recompense of his disciples, which seems to be intimated in the last of these passages, and in such other expressions as these, his giving a crown of life, his granting to sit down with him on his throne, his raising the dead, and his judging the world. But the modern Socinians pre- serve the consistency of their scheme by giving figurative interpreta- tions of all such phrases, and so resolving the accomplishment of that promise which proceeded from the love of God, purely into his power and will, without the interposition of any other being. Christ may be employed as an instrument of fulfilling the pleasure of the Almighty ; but so may angels, so may virtuous men ; and it is not from any inherent power that Christ possesses, but from that example of the truth of the promise, which Christians behold in his having been raised from the dead and set at God's right hand, that they derive the full assurance of hope. This system of pure Socinianism which I have now delineated, I shall state in a few sentences, gathered from Dr. Priestley's History of the Doctrine of Atonement. " The great object of the mission and death of Christ was to give the fullest proof of a state of retribution, in order to supply the strongest motives to virtue ; and the making an express regard to the doctrine of a resurrection to immortal life the principal sanction of the laws of virtue is an advantage peculiar to Christianity. By this peculiar advantage the gospel reforms the world, and remission of sin is consequent on reformation. For, although there are some texts in which the pardon of sin seems to be represented as dispensed in consideration of the sufferings, the merits, the resurrection, the life, or the obedience of Christ, Ave cannot but conclude, upon a careful examination, that all these views of it are partial representations, and that, according to the plain general tenor of Scripture, the pardon of sin is, in reality, always dispensed by the free mercy of God upon account of men's personal virtue, a penitent upright heart, and a reformed exemplary life, without regard to the sufferings or merit of any being whatever." The Socinians endeavour to accommodate to this system all those expressions, which Christians have learned from Scripture to apply to the gospel remedy. The following instances may serve as a spe- cimen of their mode of interpretation, Christ died for us, ^. e. for our benefit, because we derive much advantage from his death. He is our mediator, because he came from God to us to declare the divine mercy. He saves his people from their sins, because the influence of his precepts and his example, supported by the hope of a future life which he has revealed, leads them from sin to the practice of right- eousness. His blood cleanseth us from all sin, because, being shed in confirmation of his doctrine, and as a step to his resurrection, it fur- * 1 Thess.iv. 14. f 1 Cor. xv. 23. t Luke xxii. 28, 29. 420 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE nishes the most powerful incentives to virtue ; and we have redemp- tion, through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins, because we are led by the due consideration of his death and its consequences, to that repentance, which, under the merciful constitution of tlie divine gov- ernment, always obtains forgiveness. According to this system, then, Jesus Christ is a teacher of right- eousness, the messenger of divine grace, the publisher of a future life, the bright example of every virtue, and the most illustrious pattern of its reward. As far as these expressions go, he is the Saviour and Redeemer of the world ; but it is not allowed that he did any thing further to merit this character. His religion is the most perfect sys- tem of morality, delivering with the authority of heaven a more plain, and complete, and spiritual rule of duty than is any where else to be found, and exciting men to follow that rule by hopes which no other teacher was commissioned to give. It is in these respects the most effectual lesson of righteousness which ever was addressed to the world ; and in this sense only it is a remedy for the present state of moral evil. This system accords with all the principles held by those who are now called Socinians, and forms part of a great scheme, which, how- ever blameworthy it may be in many respects, has the merit of being consistent. But to Christians who do not hold these principles in their full extent, it appears to labour under insuperable difficulties. Those who believe in the pre-existence of Jesus, cannot consider his death as merely a natural event, like the death of any other man ; and they look for some purpose of his dying, beyond that of afford- ing, by his resurrection, an example of a dead man brought to life, because Jesus, appearing to them in this respect essentially distin- guished from all other men, that he existed before he was born, may be also distinguished in this further respect, that he returned to exist- ence after he died. We know that some of the ancient philosophers were accustomed to argue for a future life from that state of pre-ex- istence which they assigned to the soul ; and the inference is so natu- ral and obvious, if the supposition upon which it proceeds is admitted, that, whether the Arian or Athanasian system be adopted with regard to the dignity which Jesus had before he was born, no argument, drawn from the death and resurrection of this singular personage, can be a sufficient warrant for ordinary men to expect that they also shall be raised. Those who have a strong apprehension of the evil of sin and of the authority of the divine government, and who ob- serve, that even amongst men repentance does not always restore a person to the condition in which he was before he sinned, camiot readily admit that a simple declaration of forgiveness to all who re- turn to their duty is consistent with the holiness and majesty of the Ruler of the universe ; more especially as this declaration does not barely remit the punishment of transgression, but is connected with a promise of eternal life ; a promise which other Christians consider as restoring what had been forfeited by Adam, which the Socinians consider as so peculiar to the gospel, that it gives to man a hope which he never had before, and which all acknowledge to contain a free inestimable gift. There appears to be an expediency in some testimony of the divine displeasure against sin, at the time of declar- NATURE OP THE REMEDY. 421 ing that such a gift is to be conferred upon penitents ; and if there are in Scripture many intimations of such a testimony, they who are impressed with a sense that it is expedient will not be disposed to ex- plain them away. Those who form their system of theology upon the language of Scripture, do not find themselves warranted to sink Jesus to the office of a messenger of the divine mercy, when they recollect that he is said to have washed us from our sins in his own blood, and to have bought us with a price ; that repentance and remission of sins are uniformly connected with something which he did ; that according to his command they were preached by his apostles in his name, and that they are said to be granted by him. Ditierent systems have been formed for explaining such expressions ; but many Christian writers, who do not pretend to decide which of the systems is true, or whe- ther it is becoming in us to form any system upon the subject at all, consider expressions of this kind as plainly teaching that the interpo- sition of Christ was somehow efficacious in procuring the pardon of sin ; and it appears to them that this efficacy, whatever be the nature of it, must go very far beyond the bare declaration of a proposition which was always true, that God is merciful. All these reasons for rejecting the Socinian system are very much confirmed, by attending to the descriptions given in Scripture of the honour and power to which Jesus Christ is now exalted. Although the modern Socinians, feeling that these descriptions are inconsistent with their system, have attempted to resolve into mere figures of speech what Socinus himself interpreted literally, any Christian who reads the New Testament, not with a view to reconcile it to his own system, but in order to learn what it contains, cannot entertain a doubt that the person who appeared upon earth in a humble form, the Saviour of men, is now exalted as their Lord ; that all power in heaven and in earth is committed to him ; and that he is ordained of God to be the judge of the quick and the dead. But why is Jesus thus exalted ? Although his being preserved from that sleep of the soul which some Christians have supposed, or his being raised out of the grave from that complete dissolution which Dr. Priestley's mate- rialism teaches, may be useful to Christians as a living example of a resurrection, it cannot be said that his being advanced to the govern- ment of the universe is necessary to give us assurance of a future life. According to the Socinian system, we cannot discern in the ser- vices of this man any merit beyond that of other messengers of hea- ven, or even of his own apostles ; and we do not perceive any purpose which is to be attained by his receiving a recompense so infinitely above his deserts. If the forgiveness of sin and the gift of immoi- tality flow entirely from the mercy of God, without regard to any other being whatever, the security of them does not, in the smallest degree, depend upon the condition of the messenger by whom they Avere promised ; so that the powers, which the Scriptures ascribe to that messenger, are a mere waste, and his exaltation, unlike any other work of God, is without meaning. Such are the objections which Christians of different descriptions are led, by their principles, to urge against tlie Socinian system of redemption. Many able and serious men, who felt the force of these 38 422 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE objections, could not reconcile their minds to the third system, which they found to be the general faith of the Christian church ; and hence has arisen a middle system, which, as it is certainly clear of the objec- tions that have now been stated, appears to some to comprehend the whole doctrine of Scripture upon this subject. Section II. The middle system is founded upon a part of the doctrine of Socinus, which the modern Socinians have thrown out, viz : the power given by God to Jesus Christ after his resurrection. But many additions were made to this article in the course of the last century, and it has been spread out by several writers into a complete and beautiful system. My knowledge of it is derived from an Essay on Redemp- tion, written by an English clergyman, John Balguy, and republished by Dr. Thomas Balguy ; from a book entitled Ben Mordecai's Apology for becoming a Christian, consisting of letters upon the peculiar doc- trines of Christianity, written by Mr. Taylor, another English clergy- man ; and from a volume of sermons published by Dr. Price, the celebrated English dissenter, who, rejecting both the Socinian and the Calvinistic systems, gives to this the name which I have borrowed from him, calling it the middle system. Availing myself of these sources of information, I shall give a short exposition of the middle system, which may enable you to form a conception of the manner in which the parts of it are linked together, and of the prmcipies by wliich it is supported. The fundamental principle of the middle system is, that under the government of a righteous God a distinction ought to be made between innocents and penitents. It is allowed that God, who is accountable to none, may freely forgive the sins of his creatures ; it is allowed that, being infinitely merciful, he has no delight in punishing them ; it is allowed that repentance, without which no sinner can be received, is a commendable disposition. But after all these things are granted to the Socinians, it is still conceived to be right in itself, that those, who have sinned, should not feel their situation in every respect the same as if they had uniformly obeyed the commands of their Creator ; and it is considered as a lesson which may be useful both to them- selves and to other parts of the universe, that the restoration of the human race to the divine favour should be marked by some circum- stances sufficient to preserve the memory of their transgression. It is observed that, in the course of human affairs, the effects of the vices of some are often repaired by the virtues of otbers, repaired not only to society, but to themselves. When they become sensible of their misconduct, they do not always find it possible by any personal eflbrt to extricate themselves from all the evils in which they are involved, or to recover that place in society which they had forfeited ; but they are relieved by some generous interposition ; their professions of repentance are accepted at the intercession of a respectable friend, for the sake of something which had been done by another ; and their re-establishment in their former condition, which was not due NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 423 to themselves, thus becomes a part of the tribute paid by society to that uniform virtue, which is felt by all men to be worthy both of confidence and of reward. Upon this principle proceeded the plead- ing of Appius in his own defence : "Majorum merita," says Livy, " in rempublicam commemorabat, quo poenam deprecaretur."* In Jike manner Tacitus says, " Plautio mors remittitur ob patrui egregium meritum."t And Cicero, proceeding upon his knowledge and ex- perience of the sentiments of mankind, delivers this general rule, " oportebit eum, qui sibi ut ignoscatur postulabit, — majorum suorum beneficia, si qufB extabunt, proferre." J So we read hi the Old Testa- ment that God was merciful to the children of Israel for Abraham's sake ; § that he pardoned their idolatry at the intercession of Moses ;|| and that he accepted the prayer of his servant Job for the three friends, who had not spoken of him the thing that is right.TF These and other instances of the same kind in the history of Scrip- ture, according with what we often behold amongst men, and cor- responding also with our apprehension of the essential difference between the merit of those who have always obeyed, and of those who only repent of their sin, are considered in the middle system as an opening of the great scheme revealed in the gospel. Jesus Christ, the first born of every creature, by whom God made the worlds, the purest and the most glorious being that ever proceeded from the Father of all, beheld the miserable condition of the human race, the forfeiture which they had incurred by the transgression of Adam, and the multiplied offences which they were daily committing against the majesty of heaven. Prompted by love to the souls of men, he left the bosom of the Father, laid aside the glories of his nature, and became a man of sorrows, that he might extricate from evil those whom he had made. All the scorn and persecution which he received while he went about doing good to men ; all the amaze- ment and agony which his pure spirit sustained amidst the iniquities of those with whom he dwelt : all the bitter sufferings which marked the end of his life upon earth, were the voluntary acts of a person who had devoted himself to the accomplishment of a most gracious purpose. They were accepted by God, who, not willing that any should perish, had given the Son of his love to be in this manner the deliverer of the human race ; and they were rewarded by the powers conferred upon him after his resurrection. His reward added to the dignity of his character, by placing him at the head of the creation, and rendering the most exalted spirits subject to his dominion. But it was not the prospect of any increase of his personal glory which called forth his exertions. He had no need to be greater or happier than he was before he visited this earth ; and he would not appear in a light so truly exalted, had he come here merely with the view of holding a higher place in heaven when he returned thither. The joy set before the Redeemer of the world, for which it is said he en- dured the cross, the recompense in the prospect of which he left the mansions of bliss, and drank the bitter cup given him by his Father, is to be gathered from such passages in the New Testament as the * Liv. iii. 56. f Tac. Ann. xi. .36. t Cic. de Inv. ii. 35. § Ps. cv. 42, 43. II Exod. xxxii. ^ Job xlii. 424 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE following: John v. 26, 27; vi. 39; xvii. 2. Acts v. 31. Heb. ii. 9, 10; V. 9. The idea which is plainly expressed in some of these passages, and which appears to be implied in all of them, is this : that there was given to the Son of man, after his sufferings, the power of recovering a lost world, of removing all the evils which sin had introduced, of raising men from death, which is the punishment of sin, and of bring- ing those that repent to eternal life. All this is the reward of the services of the Redeemer ; that is, although it redounds to the advantage of the penitents, it is not given to them as what they earn for themselves, but it is given to him as his recompense ; and in this exalted sense are fulfilled the words which the evangelical prophet Isaiah introduced into his prediction of the sufferings of the Messiah : " he shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied ; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many."* Jesus Christ did see of the travail of his soul and was satisfied ; in other words, he received his reward by justifying many. The natural recompense of disinterested exertion, and the purest joy which a benevolent mind can taste, is an enlargement of the power of doing good. Feeble dependent creatures like us are glad to receive, as a reward of the good which we do from love unfeigned, an exten- sion of the sphere of our private enjoymejits, and an establishment of our own security. But he, who is styled in Scripture the Son of Man, and the brightness of his Father's glory, submitted to suffering purely for this purpose, that he might receive from his Father the right of communicating happiness ; and the more complete and irretrievable on the part of man the forfeiture by sin had been, and the more extensive and precious the blessings which the Redeemer is empowered to convey, so much the more exquisite and glorious is his reward. This system derives considerable support from its preserving that striking contrast between the first and the second Adam, which we found the Apostle Paul marking in the fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. " As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous." The punishment of Adam is transmitted to those who do not sin after the similitude of his transgression. But the evils which flow from this constitution meet in the gospel with a remedy perfectly analogous to the disease ; for the reward of Jesus Christ is communicated to those who are very unlike himself; and, according to the middle system, it is literally by his obedience that many are made righteous. The middle system is further supported by its exhibiting, in a most pleasing and instructive light, that essential difference between those who have uniformly obeyed God, and those who only repent of their transgressions, which we expect to find under the govern- ment of God. That exalted Being, who, in making the worlds, fulfilled the commandment of God, and in whom the Father was always well pleased, by coming to this earth to do the will of God, had ah opportunity of displaying before angels and men, in a degree more eminent than they had ever beheld, humility, obedience, * Isaiah liii, 11. NATURE OF THE REMEDY'. 425 resignation, patience, fortitude, generosity ; and in this transcendent excellence of virtue was crowned with a reward the most iUustrious which the Fatlier ever bestowed, and the most dehghtful to him upon whom it was conferred, the power of extricating the human race from ail the evils which they had incurred by sin, and of restoring to them the gilt of immortality which they had forfeited. In this method of saving sinners there is a continual memorial of the evil of sin, and a lesson to all the intelligent creation of God, that without some very singular interposition those who have sinned cannot obtain pardon. For, although the Son of God was connected with the iiuman race from the time that by him God made the worlds, a much closer connexion was necessary in order to their being saved from sin ; and the constitution, by which penitents are received into the divine favour, is such as to make them feel a constant and an entire depend- ence upon their Redeemer. It is by his power that they are delivered from the effects of their transgression : the accomplishment of their salvation is premial to him, not to them, that is, all that they receive is given them, not upon their own account, but upon account of what he hath done. At the same time, this method of checking the pre- sumption of sinners is a bright display of divine love. God the Father provides a method for receiving his returning children into his family ; and he rewards the generous exertion of his own Son, by opening the mansions of heaven to those whom his Son shall bring thither. In all the steps of their progress heavenward, they experience the grace of the Redeemer, and daily reap the fruit of his reward ; and when they shall at length enter the city of the living God, their numbers and their felicity will redound to his honour. " These are they," as one of the elders about the throne said to John in the Reve- lation, " which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." " They follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth ; and the new song that is sung by every creature in heaven has a peculiar significancy when it proceeds from their mouth, " worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and honour, and glory, and blessing." Many of the passages of Scripture, which Christians are accustomed to apply to the remedy brought in the gospel, receive an interpretation at once more exalted and more natural from those who hold the mid- dle system, than from those who hold the Socinian. According to the middle system, Jesus is said to be the propitiation for our sins, because by his meritorious obedience he hath procured our reconciliation with God. He is said to have given himself an offering and a sacrifice to God for us, because he devoted himself to death in order to accom- plish our salvation. He is our mediator, because through him we have access to the Father. He is our advocate, who maketh inter- cession for us, because all that we ask, and all that we receive is for his sake, because nothing is due to us, but all that heaven can bestow is due to the perfection of his obedience ; and we are saved by him, because with the same grace which led him to sutler for our sakes, he imparts, to those who repent, the gifts which he hath received from his Father, accounting their salvation his reward. A system, which gives such views of our dependence upon our Redeemer, follows out those lessons of humility by which the gospel has for ever excluded 38* 3L 426 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE the presumption of sinners, and the boasting of those who are saved ; and it may be regarded as a commentary upon these vvords of the apostle, "All things are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's;"* and upon the words of our Lord himself, <' To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne."! The middle system, which I have now delineated, has the merit of being beautiful and consistent. As far as it goes, it proceeds, in a great measure, upon the language and the views of the New Testa- ment. It appears to unite, in the pardon of those who repent, the rectitude which becomes the Judge of the universe, with tliat com- passion which we feel ourselves so willing to ascribe to the Deity. It gives penitents all that security for being restored to the divine favour, and for obtaining the reward of eternal life, whicli can arise from the power of their Redeemer ; and it seems so peculiarly calcu- lated to illustrate his glory, that, in the atfectionate admiration with which it is natural for Christians to regard him, the heart inclines the understanding to receive it as the whole truth. But there are two objections to this system, which, with a great part of the Christian world, are sufficient to counterbalance these advantages, so far as to satisfy them, that although a great part of this system may be true, it is not a complete account of the gospel remedy. The first objection is, that the middle system plainly involves in it the Arian opinion concerning the person of Christ. It presents to our view, a being, who, by performing a hard service in the government of God, acquires new powers, and is advanced to a degree of supre- macy and a capacity of conferring happiness, which he did not formerly possess. But this view of Christ is totally inconsistent with the Athanasian system. Those, who believe that Jesus Christ is truly and essentially God, think that they are naturally led, by the manner in which his exaltation is spoken of in Scripture, to consider it as part of the oixovo^ia there revealed, a manifestation of the Son of God, an investiture of the same person in his human nature with that glory which he had from eternity in his divine. But they cannot believe that he became, by sufiering,more able to save than he was before. They are compelled, by their creed, to remove from their conceptions of him all those ideas of dependence and changeableness which are necessarily implied in an enlargement of powers ; and they cannot degrade him whom they worship as God, equal with the Father, to a rank with those inferior spirits, who, by progressive improvements in goodness, may become worthy of holding more conspicuous stations, and of being appointed to more important offices in the administration of the universe. The second objection to the middle system is, that although a beau- tiful and plausible theory, yet, like many other theories, it proceeds upon a partial view of facts. It is the theory of men who are satisfied that the Socinian scheme is indefensible, but who are at the same time solicitous to avoid those particular determinate views of the sufferings of Christ, which other Christians derive from a literal interpretation * 1 Cor. iii. 22, 23. f Rev, iii. 21. NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 427 of Scripture. Hence they are obliged to have recourse to such views as are vague and general. They studiously throw into the shade many parts of that information which the Scriptures have been generally supposed to convey ; and they hope, by the splendid parts of their theory, to occupy and please the mind, so that tlie defect shall not he felt. Accordingly it will be observed, tliat while the power, which the Redeemer is supposed to have acquired by his sufferings, stands forth in this theory a luminous object, no specific reason is assigned for the sufferings. They are a display of benevolence, a virtuous exertion on the part of the Redeemer, and the reward of them redounds in the most effectual manner to tlie benefit of the human race. But we do not see, by this theory, any thing in the sufferings peculiarly applicable to the' situation of those who are re- deemed. Exertions of another kind might have merited the same reward ; and we feel ourselves at a loss to account for the fitness of many things which he endured, and for a great part of that language in which the Scriptures speak of his sufferings. Section III. The two preceding schemes concerning the nature of the Gospel remedy are the invention of modern times. What I called the Catho- lic opinion upon this subject appears to have been derived from the Scriptures by the earliest Christian writers ; it has been generally held in the Christian world ; and it enters into the creed of the two esta- blished churches of this island. The church of England concludes the second article, which is a description of the Son of God, with these words, " who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to recon- cile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for orighial guilt, but also for actual sins of men." And the same opinion is more fully expressed in the prayer of consecration which forms part of the coni- munion service, "Almighty God, our heavenly Father, who of thy tender mercy didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ to sufi:'er death upon the cross for our redemption, who made there, by his one obla- tion of himself once offered, a full, perfect, and sufiicient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world." The words of our Confession of Faith, chap. viii. 5, are these, " The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he, through the eternal Spirit, once oftered up unto God, hath fully satis- fied the Justice of his Father ; and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven for all those whom the Father hath given unto him." It is the first part of this paragraph which is peculiar to the Catholic ophiion ; for those who hold the middle system also say that by the merit of Christ's obedi- ence, they who repent shall receive the reward of eternal life ; and therefore they need not scruple to say that he purchased an everlasting inheritance for them. But they do not admit that lie hath fully sat- isfied the justice of the Father, by his sacrifice of himself offered up unto God ; and this is the point in which they unite with the Socin- ians. This distinguishing part of the Catholic opinion is known by 428 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE the name of the doctrme of the atonement, or the satisfaction of Christ. The subject is in itself so important, it has received such ample and acute discussion from the times of Socinus to the present day, and the points in controversy enter so much into all the discourses .and offices of the ministers of the Gospel, that I should fail in my duty if I did not speak of it fully, A much shorter illustration will suffice for the other part of the Catholic opinion, — the manner in which those who hold it connect the promise and the hope of life everlasting with the obedience of Jesus Christ. The doctrine of the atonement or satisfaction of Christ is not neces- sarily connected with a belief in his divinity ; for this doctrine was ably defended by Dr. Clarke, and it is held by many who avow that they do not consider the Son as truly God. But it is impossible for any one, who believes that Jesus Christ is a mere man, to entertain such an opinion of the value of his sufferings, as to think that they could be a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and a satisfaction to the justice of God. A denial, therefore, of the pre-existence of our Saviour, and a denial of the doctrine of satisfaction, are the two leading fea- tures of Socinianism, and they necessarily go together ; whereas all, as far as I know, without exception, who believe in the Trinity, and a part of those who consider Jesus as the most exalted creature of God, embrace that part of the catholic opinion which we are now to state, that is to say, they believe that as this glorious person could not suffer in the form of God, he was made in the likeness of men, and dwelt amongst us in the body prepared for him, for this purpose chiefly, that he might suffer for the sins of men ; that the sorrows of his life, the agony of his last hours, and the bitterness of his death, were the punishment due to our transgressions, which it pleased the Father to lay upon him, and which he cheerfully undertook ; and that the sins of those who repent and believe are forgiven upon account of this substitution of Jesus Christ in their stead, which is called his vicarious suffering. It is well known, that the general strain of Scripture favours this opinion ; for we meet with numberless expressions of this kind. " Christ was delivered for our offences ; he suffered for sins the just for the unjust ; by his stripes we are healed ; he hath made peace by the blood of his cross — he hath given himself for us an offering, and a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour." But it is not by a bare enu- meration of such texts,than which there is nothing more easy, that the Catholic opinion is to be established. For those who oppose it do not deny that it appears to be favoured by the language of Scrip- ture. But they maintain that it is liable to so many objections, and in particular is so contrary to the moral attributes of the Deity, that it cannot be true, and that they would not believe it even although it were taught in Scripture more plainly than it is : and they say further, that this opinion, though apparently favoured by Scripture, is not necessarily implied in the language there used, that the phrases em- ployed by those who hold it, viz. vindictive justice, vicarious suffering, substitution, and satisfaction, are of human invention, and that the expressions in Scripture which have been conceived to warrant such phrases admit of a milder interpretation. This being the manner in which the Catholic opinion is combated, KATURE OF THE REMEDY. 429 those who defend it have to show, in the first place, that it is not irrational or nnjust ; for, if it were, it could not form, as they say it does, the most important article in the Christian revelation ; and in the second place, after they have fairly stated and vindicated their opinion, it remains for them to show that it is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, that the views there given of the method of our redemption by the sufferings of Christ, correspond with the language which they employ in statmg their opinion, and with the principles upon which they rest the vindication of it. I shall follow this natm-al division of the defence of the doctrine of the atonement ; and I think that I shall thus be able to furnish you with a complete view of the kind of argument employed to prove that it is agreeable to reason, and that it is taught by Scripture. 130 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. CHAPTER III. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. The first thing necessary for those who defend the Cathohc opinion, respecting the gospel remedy, is to show that it may be stated in such a manner as not to appear irrational or unjust. The objections urged against it are of a very formidable kind. Christians who hold other systems concerning the gospel remedy unite with the enemies of revelation in misrepresenting this doctrine ; and if you form your notion of it from the accounts commonly given by either of these classes of writers, you will perhaps be disposed to agree with Socinus in thinking, that whether it be contained in the Scriptures or not it cannot be true. It has been said that this doctrine represents the Almighty as moved with fury at the insults offered to his Supreme Majesty, as impatient to pour forth his fury upon some being, as inditferent whether that being deserves it or not, and as perfectly appeased upon findmg an object of vengeance in his own innocent Son. It has been said that a doctrine which represents the Almighty as sternly demanding a full equivalent for that which was due to him, and as receiving that equivalent in the sufferings of his Son, transfers all the affection and gratitude of the human race, from an inexorable being who did not remit any part of his right, to another being who satisfied his claim. It has been said that a translation of euilt is impossible, because guilt is personal, and that a doctrine, which represents the innocent as punished instead of the guilty, and the guilty as escaping by this punishment, contradicts the first principles of justice, subverts all our ideas of a righteous government, and, by holding forth an example of reward and punishment dispensed by heaven without any regard to the character of those who receive them, does, in fact, encourage men to live as they please. These objections are the more formidable, that they have received no small countenance from the language of many of the most zealous friends of this doctrine. The atonement presents a subject of spe- culation most interesting to the great body of the people, who are alwa3^s incapable of metaphysical precision of thought ; it enters into loose and popular harangues delivered by many who are more ac- customed to speak than to think ; and the manner of stating it has been toa often accommodated to prejudices which are inconsistent with truth, and adverse to morality. It is not surprising that, in such circumstances, the mistakes of the friends of this doctrine have given much advantage to the misrepresentation of its enemies ; and it is upon this account very necessary for you, the great object of whose DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 43l Study is to acquire just and enlarged apprehensions of the whole scheme of Cliristian doctrine, that you may be able to defend that truth which you understand, to beware of forming your notions of this capital article of our faith from the incorrect superficial statements of it which may come in your way. Happily for your instruction, the objections to this doctrine have called forth some of the greatest masters of reason in its defence. Grotius, whose comprehensive vigorous mind was illuminated by an intimate acquaintance with jurisprudence, wrote, in answer to Socinus, a treatise, Dc Satisfactione C/iristi, which is both a fair exposition and a complete vindicat-ion of the doctrine ; and the reply published by Crellius, an adherent of Socinus, was answered in the end of the seventeenth century by the learned and able Bishop Stil- lingfleet, who, in his discourse on the sufferings of Christ, has unfolded and illustrated the leading principles laid down by Grotius, and by applying them to the acute reasonings of Crellius, has shown how ready a solution they afford of every objection. Dr. Clarke, with that accuracy of thought and that precision of language which are his characteristics, has explained within a short compass, in a sermon upon the nature of the sufferings of Christ, and elsewhere occasionally, the true principles of this doctrine. The general circulation of Dr. Clarke's works has rendered these principles familiar to many, who have not leisure to study the more elaborate treatises of Grotius and Stillingfieet ; they are now pretty generally understood, and you will find them spread out, and applied with much propriety to the form in which some modern writers have brought forward the ancient objec- tions, in two treatises published not many years ago, the one entitled, Jesus Christ the Mediator between God and Man, by Tomkins ; the other. Vicarious Sacrifice, by Elliot. Availing myself of these helps, I shall now proceed to state that precise notion of the doctrine of the atonement, upon which the reasonableness of it is rested by those who know best how to defend it. This fair statement of the Catholic opinion will involve in it an answer to the objections which I mentioned, and will prepare us for discovering, by a critical examination of various passages of Scripture, the evidence that it is there taught, and the views of it which are there given. Section I. The first principle upon which a fair statement of the doctrine of the atonement proceeds is this, that sin is a violation of law, and that the almighty, in requiring an atonement in order to the pardon of sin, acts as the supreme lawgiver. So important is this principle, that all the objections to the doctrine proceed upon other views of sin, which to a certain extent, appear to be just, but which cannot be admitted to be complete without acknowledging that it is impossible to answer the objections. Thus, if you consider sin as merely an insult to the majesty of heaven, God the Father as the person offended by this insult, and that wrath of God, of which the Scriptures speak, as 432 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. something analagous to the emotion of anger excited in our breasts by the petulance of our neighbours, it would seem, according to the notions which we entertain, more generous to lay aside this wrath, and to accept of an acknowledgment of the ofience, than to demand reparation of the insult ; and it may be thought that the Almighty, in requiring another to suffer before an offence which is personal to himself can be forgiven, discovers a jealousy of his own dignity un- becoming that supreme majesty, which is incapable of being tarnished by the conduct of his creatures. In like manner, if, because our Lord sometimes calls trespasses by the name of debts, we stretch the comparison so far as to make it a complete description of sin, if, fol- lowing out the similitude, we consider the Almighty as a creditor to whom the sinner has contracted a debt, and forgiveness as the remis- sion of that debt which would have been paid by the punishment of the sinner, there does not occur from this description any reason why the Almighty may not as freely forgive the sins of his creatures, as a creditor may remit what is due to himself; and, therefore," when, in- stead of doing so, he requires payment of the debt by the sufferings of his Son, he appears in the light of a rigorous creditor, who, having insisted upon his own, although the person originally bound was not able to pay, receives it from a surety, so that all that grace of God in the forgiveness of sin, which the Scriptures extol, is without meaning, for when the debt is paid, the liberation of the debtor is a matter of right, not of favour. Further, if the intrinsic evil of sin is the only thing attended to, and the sinner be considered in no other light than as a reasonable creature who has deformed his nature, and whose character has become odious, it may be thought that repentance is the proper remedy of this evil. Men, not being qualified to judge of the sincerity of those who profess sorrow for their past trespasses, would act unwisely if they pardoned every person who appears to be penitent ; but it is impossible that the Supreme Being can be mistaken in judging of the hearts of men; and, therefore, if the hatefulness of their conduct be the only cause of alienation, whenever he discerns in them the marks of true reformation, that cause no longer exists, and the sinner, by a real change' upon his character, returns into favour with his Creator. According to this view of the matter, all that is necessary for dispensing forgiveness is an effectual method of promoting reformation ; and the Socinians appear to give a complete account of the gospel of Christ, when they say that it saves us from our sins by leading us to forsake them. Thus many of the principal objections against the doctrine of atonement remain without an answer, when we confine our notions of sin to these three views of it. But although it be true that sin is an insult to the majesty of heaven, by which the Supreme Being is offended, that it is in some sense a debt to the Creator, and that it cannot be beheld by a pure spirit without the highest disapprobation, there is a further view of it not directly included under any of these ; and all the objections which I mentioned arise from the stopping short at some one of these views, or at least employing the language pecu- liar to them, without going on to state this further view, that sin is a violation of the law given by the Supreme Being. But it is under the character of a lawgiver that the Almighty is to be regarded both in DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 433 punishing and in forgiving the sins of men. For akhongh by creation he is the absokite lord and proprietor of all, who may withont challenge or control dispose of every part of his works in what manner he pleases, he does not exercise this right of sovereignty in the government of his reasonable creatures, but he has made known to them certain laws, wliich express what he would have them to do, and he has annexed to these laws certain sanctions which declare the rewards of obedience, and the consequences of transgression. It is this which constitutes what we call the moral government of God, of which all those actions of the Almighty, that respect what is right or wrong in the conduct of his reasonable creatures, form a part, and under which every man feels that he lives. For although this moral government be administered with very unequal measures of instruc- tion to the subjects, there is no situation in which the human race have the use of their faculties, without recognising in one degree or other the law df their nature ; and whether this knowledge be derived from sentiment, or reason, or tradition, or written revelation, every thing which to them is sin may with accuracy be defined the trans- gression of a law. If the Almighty, then, is to be regarded as a lawgiver, we must endeavour to rise to the most exalted conceptions which we are able to form of the plan of his moral government ; and for this purpose it is necessary that we should abstract from every kind of weakness which is incident to the administration of human governments, and lay hold of those principles and maxims which reason and experience teach us to consider as essential to a good government, and without which it does not appear to us that that expression has any meaning. Now it is the first principle of every good government, that laws are enacted for the benefit of the community. The happiness of the whole body depends upon their being observed, for they would not have been enacted, if the observance of them had been a matter of indifference to the public. Hence every person who violates the laws, besides the disrespect which he shows to that authority by which they were enacted, besides the hurt which individuals may sustain by his action, does an injury to the public, because he disturbs that order and security which the laws establish. It is therefore essential to the excellence of government, that there succeeds, immediately after disobedience, what is called guilt, i. e. the desert of punishment, an obligation to suffer that which the law prescribes. Accordingly in the code of laws of many northern nations, who were accustomed to estimate all crimes at certain rates, a murderer not only paid a sum to the relations of the deceased, as a compensation for their loss, but he paid a sum to the king for the breach of the peace.* And in all countries, that which is properly called punishment does not mean the putting the rights of a private party, who may have been imme- diately injured, in the same state in which they were before the trespass was committed, but it means the reparation made to the public by the suffering of the criminal, for the disorder arising from his breach of the laws. The law generally defines what the measure of this suftering shall be, and it is applied to particular cases by * Tac. Germ. xii. 39 3M 434 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. criminal judges, who, being only interpreters of the law, have no power to remit the punishment. It is true that in most human governments a power is lodged somewhere of granting pardon, because from the imperfection which necessarily adheres to them, it may often be inexpedient or even unjust, that a person who has been legally condemned should suffer ; and there are times when the legislature sees meet to pass acts of indemnity. But it is only in very particular circumstances that the safety of the state admits the escape of a criminal ; and in most cases the supreme authority proceeds, not with wrath, but from a calm and fixed regard to the essential interests of the community, to deter other subjects from violating the laws, by exhibiting to their view punishment as the consequence of transgres- sion. If we apply these maxims and principles, which appear to us im- plied in the very nature of good government, we shall find it impos- sible to conceive of God as a lawgiver, without thinking it essential to his character to punish transgression ; and the perfection of his government, far from superseding this exercise of that character, seems to render it the more becoming and the more indispensable. It is not that the wickedness of men can hurt him, that his throne is in any danger of being shaken by their combinations, or that his trea- sures may be exhausted if his subjects do not pay what they owe him ; it is not from any such emotion as personal injury excites in our breast ; but it is because his laws are founded in the essential differ- ence between good and evil ; because they are adapted with wisdom and goodness to the circumstances of those to whom they are given, and because the happiness of the whole rational creation depends upon the observance of them, that guilt under the divine government is followed by punishment. Hence you will observe that what divines call vindictive or punitive justice, far from deserving the opprobrious epithets with which it has been often loaded by hasty and superficial writers, belongs to the character of the Ruler of the universe, as much as any other attribute of the divine nature. For if the goodness of the lawgiver, and the excellence of his laws, do not lead men to ob- serve them, it remains for him to vindicate their authority, and to pre- serve that order for the sake of which they were given, by employing the punishment of transgression as the mean of preventing the repe- tition of it. This mean is employed according to the natural course when the sinner bears the punishment of his own transgression ; and he can have no title to complain, although he endures the whole of that suf- fering which the law prescribes. In human governments, those who execute the laws seldom have much liberty of choice in the exercise of punitive justice, because they are either merely the interpreters of law, or are accountable to some higher authority ; and even when they feel no such external restraint, their imperfect knowledge of the effects of their own decisions makes it appear to them safer and wiser to follow the established course. But the Almighty, who has an entire comprehension of the whole circumstances of every case, may perceive that different manners of exercising punitive justice are equally well calculated to attain the ends of punishment. As he giveth not account of his matters, he cannot be restrained by any cir- DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 435 ciimstance foreign to himself from adopting that manner which ap- pears to him best suited to the circumstances of the case ; and even our understandings can discern in the situation of a guilty world the strongest reasons for departing from that method of exercising puni- tive justice, which lays the whole punishment of transgression upon the transgressor. For if all men are sinners, and if death, which is declared to be the punishment of sin, cannot possibly mean that those who die for their sins shall be happy hereafter, but must include the dissolution or the future misery of the sinner, it is manifest that the Supreme Lawgiver, by exercising punitive justice in this manner, Avould have put an end to the existence of the human race, or ren- dered them for ever wretched ; and therefore, if there is any manner by which the ends of punitive justice can be attained in a consistency with the salvation of the human race, it appears to us, judging a priori, that it is becoming the Almighty to adopt this manner, be- cause in so doing he acts both as the Lawgiver of the universe, and as the Father of manlvind. In the substitution of Jesus Christ, according to the Catholic opi- nion, there is a translation of the guilt of the sinners to him, by which is not meant that he who was innocent became a sinner, but that what he suffered Avas upon account of sin. To perceive the reason for adopting this expression, you must carry in your minds a precise notion of the meaning of the three words, sin, guilt, and punishment. Sin is the violation of law ; guilt is the desert of punishment which succeeds this violation ; and punishment is the suffering in consequence of this desert. When you separate suffering from guilt, it ceases to be punishment, and becomes mere calamity or affliction ; and although the Almighty may be conceived, by his sovereign dominion, to have the right of laying any measure of suffering upon any being, yet suf- fering, even when inflicted by heaven, unless it is connected with guilt, does not attain the ends of punishment. In order, therefore, that the sufferings of the Son of God might be such as it l3ecame the Lawgiver of the universe to inflict, it was necessary that the sufferer, who had no sin of his own, should be considered and declared as taking upon him that obligation to punishment which the human race had incurred by their sins. Then his sufferings became punishment, not indeed deserved by sins of his own, but due to him as bearing the sins of others. Although the sufferings of Jesus Christ, in consequence of this translation of guilt, became the punishment of sin, it is plain that they are not that very punishment which the sins deserved ; and hence it is that they are called by those who hold the Catholic opinion, a satisfaction for the sins of the world. The word satisfaction is known in the Roman law, from whicli it is borrowed, to denote that method of fulfilling an obligation which may either be admitted or refused. When a person, by the non-performance of a contract, has incurred a penalty, he is entitled to a discharge of the contract, if he pays the penalty ; but if, instead of paying the penalty itself, he offers some- thing in place of it, the person who has a right to demand tine penalty, may grant a discharge or not, as he sees meet. If he is satisfied with that which is offered, he will grant the discharge ; if he is not satis- fied, he cannot be called unjust ; he may act wisely in refusing it. 436 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. According to this known meaning of the word, the sufferings of Christ for sin have received tire name of a satisfaction to the justice of God, because they were not the penaUy that had been incurred, but were something accepted by the Lawgiver instead of it. It appears even to us inconsistent with the character of the Lawgiver of the universe, and many reasons in his universal government, which we are not quaUfied to perceive, may have rendered it in the highest degree unfit, tliat an act of indemnity, by which the sins of all that repent and be- lieve are forgiven, should be published to the human race without some awful example of the punishment of transgression. It pleased God to exhibit his example in the sufferings of his own Son. By declaring that the iniquities of the whole world were laid upon this person, he transferred to him the guilt of mankind, and thus showed them, at the very time when their sins are forgiven, that no transgres- sion of his law can escape with impunity. It follows from the account which has been given of a satisfaction for sin, that it cannot procure the pardon of the sinner without the good will of the lawgiver, because it offers something in place of that which he was entitled to demand ; and for this reason the Catholic opinion concerning the nature of the remedy brought in the gospel, far from excluding, will be found, when rightly understood, to magnify the mercy of the Lawgiver, Those, who know best how to defend it, never speak of any contest between the justice and the mercy of God, because they believe that there is the most perfect harmony amongst all the divine perfections : they never think so unworthily of God as to conceive that his fury was appeased by the interposition of Jesus Christ ; but they uniformly represent the scheme of our redemption as originating in the love of God the Father, who both provided and accepted that substitution, by which sinners are saved ; and they hold that the forgiveness of sins is free, because although granted upon that consideration which the Lawgiver saw meet to exact, it was given to those who had no right to expect it, and who could have fulfilled their obligation to punishment only by their destruction, or their eternal misery. One essential point in the statement of the Catholic opinion yet re- mains. Allowing that it became the Ruler of the universe to exhibit the righteousness of his government, by punishing transgression at the time when remission of sins was preached in the gospel, and that we are thus able to assign the reason of that translation of guilt, without which a guilty world could not be saved, it may still be inquired upon what principle an innocent person was made to suffer this punish- ment : and it is one part of the objections to the Catholic opinion, that no reason of expediency, not even mercy to the human race, can render it right or fit, that he who had done no sin should be punished as a sinner. When the Socinians are asked in what manner they can account for the sufferings of Jesus Christ, who, even in the judg- ment of those who lower his character to that of a peaceable mortal, must be allowed to have suffered more, although he sinned less, than other men, they resolve them into an act of dominion in the Creator, the same kind of sovereignty by which he often sends the heaviest afflictions upon the worthiest persons, and, disposing of his creatures at his pleasure, brings good out of evil. But this is an account to DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 437 which those who hold the Catholic opinion cannot have recourse, because their whole system proceeds upon this principle, that the Almighty is to be considered, in every part of tiiis transaction, not as an absolute proprietor, who does what he will with his own, but as a righteous governor, who derives the reasons of his conduct from the laws which constitute his government. In the Catholic opmion, therefore, the consent of him who endured the sufferings is conjomed with the act of the Lawgiver, who accepted them as a satisfaction for sin ; and it is by the conjunction of these two circumstances, the con- sent of the sufferer and the acceptance of the Lawgiver, that the suf- ferings of Christ are essentially distinguished from all other mstances of vicarious punishment. The ordinary course of human affairs, and the Scripture history, furnish many cases in which persons suffer for the sins of others. It is part of the positive laws of many states, and of the general constitu- tion of nature, that the effects of transgression extend beyond the lives and fortunes of those by whom it was committed, and that children, subjects, or other connexions thus endure a larger portion of evil than it is likely they would have endured had it not been for the sins of those who went before them. You will find cases of this kind brought forward, and very much dwelt upon, even in the most masterly vindications of the Catholic opinion ; but I own it appears to me, that the principles upon which the Catholic opinion is defended destroy every kind of similarity between these cases and the sufferings of Christ. In all such instances of the extension of punishment, per- sons suffer for sins, of which they are innocent, without their consent, in consequence of a constitution under which they are born, and by a disposition of events which they probably lament ; and their suffering is not supposed to have any effect in alleviathig the evils incurred by those whose punishment they bear. The constitution by which pun- ishment is thus extended has a striking similarity to the effects produced by the fall of Adam upon his posterity. It suggests a general analogy by which the second or the fourth opinion upon that subject may be vindicated ; but it is wholly inapplicable to the suffer- ings which procured the remedy. Cases which appear to be more similar are those in which parents or friends, from affection and choice, submit to much labour and pain, by which they are able to mitigate the afflictions of others, and often to extricate them from danger or sorrow. Such cases intimate, as has been well said by Bishop Butler, that the general constitution of the universe is mercilul, /. e. that evils, however deserved, are not left without remedy ; and the generosity and willingness which brings the remedy, have been considered as suggesting an analogy favourable to that which I call the Middle opinion. But all such cases fall very far short of the Catholic opinion. For although persons in certain situations may conceive it to be their duty, or may feel an inclination to make an exertion of benevolence painful to themselves, and profitable to others ; and although the enthusiasm of aflection has sometimes pro- duced a wish to bear for others all that they had deserved, yet, from the nature of the thin?, there cannot be in such cases a legal substi- tution. No person is"entitled to give a formal consent that his life shall be taken by God in place of that of another, because his own is 39* 438 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. entirely at the disposal of his Creator; and it would be presumptuous in him to offer to the Almighty to suffer the punishment of another man's sins, for every man has to bear his own iniquity, and every man may know, that if God were to enter into judgment with him, this is a load more than sufficient for him. When you turn to human judgments, you will find nothing exactly similar to what is called a satisfaction for sin by the sufferings of Clu-ist ; and a little attention will satisfy you that the dissimilarity is not accidental, but is founded on the nature of things. In those cases in which the penalty incurred by breach of contract is a sum of money, or a prestation that may be performed by any one, he who pays the sum, or does the service for the person originally bound, undergoes what may properly be called vicarious punishment ; but he cannot be said to make satisfaction, because he does the very thing which was required, and the liberation of the pannel becomes, in con- sequence, of such substitution, a matter of right, not of favour. In those cases in which the penalty incurred is a punishment that attaches to the person of the pannel, as imprisonment, banishment, stripes, or death, human law does not admit of substitution, because in all such cases there cannot be that concurrence of the acceptance of the law- giver, and the valid consent of the substitute, without which substitu- tion is illegal. Corporal chastisement and imprisonment for a limited time are hitended not only as examples to others, but as a method of reforming the vices of the criminal, — they are a medicine which must be administered, not to another, but to the patient. Perpetual im- prisonment, banishment, and death, are inflicted upon those whom the law considers as incorrigible ; and besides being examples, are intended to prevent the danger of any further harm being done to the community by the persons who are thus punished. But if another were punished in their stead, the danger would still exist ; at least it is impossible for human government to judge how far the lesson ad- ministered by the punishment of another would correct the vice of those who deserved to have suffered it. There was a circumstance in the practice of ancient nations, which may appear to furnish an exception to these remarks ; for it is known that, in the intercourse of states, hostages were often given as a security that a treaty should be fulfilled ; and that in private causes, persons called wti^vxoo pledged their own lives for the lives of those who had been convicted of a capital crime. If the nation did not fulfil the contract, the hostage was put to death ; — if the criminal did not appear, the surety was executed. But there are two essential points of dissimilarity between these cases and the subject of which we are now speaking. The first is, that neither the nation nor the criminal was liberated by this vicarious suffering. The criminal was amenable to the sentence of the law, whenever he was apprehended, although the avtt.'^vxoi had suffered ; and the nation was considered as having broken the treaty, although it had sacrificed its citizen. And thus in the sufferings inflicted upon hostages and sureties, there was not that translation of guilt by which the punishment of one person takes away the obligation of another to suffer punishment. But the second point of dissimilarity is still more essential. Supposing it had been understood as a part of the law of nations, that the punishment DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 439 of a hostage cancelled the obligation of a treaty ; supposing it had been part of the criminal jurisprudence of any country, that one sub- ject might be carried forth to execution in place of another who had been condemned to die, still such substitution would have been unjust : it might have expressed the sentiments of those times with regard to vicarious punishment, but it could not have reconciled that punish- ment with the eternal law of righteousness, because no man is entitled to consent that his life shall be given in place of the life of another. He has power to dispose of his goods and of his labour, in any way that is not contrary to the laws of God, or the regulations of the com- munity under whose protection he lives ; but he has not power to dispose of his life, which he received from his Creator, which he is bound to preserve during the pleasure of him who gave it, and of the improvement of which he has to render an account. A man, indeed, is often called to expose his life to danger in the discharge of his duty ; and it is not the part either of a man or of a Clu"istian to value life so much as, for the sake of preserving it, to decline doing what he ought to do. I3ut that he may be warranted to make a sacrifice inconsistent with the first law of his nature, the law of self-preservation, it should be clearly marked out to him to be his duty, by circumstances not of his own choosing. It is true also, that the first principles of social union give the rulers of the state a right to call forth the subjects in the most hazardous services, because a nation cannot exist unless it be defended by the members. But if, in consequence of this connexion with the community, a good citizen should not feel himself at liberty to decline when he is sent as an hostage, and if he should be put to death because the nation from which he came did not fulfil the treaty, the illegality of the substitution would only be transferred from the individual who did his duty in obeying, to the community who took the life of a subject, not to defend the state, but to leave the state at liberty to break its faith. To the avu-^vxoi, of the ancients there was not the apology of a public order. Theirs was a private act, proceed- ing often, it may be, from the most laudable sentiments, but exceeding the powers given to man, and upon that account invalid. The purpose of this long deduction was to account for what might at first sight appear an objection to the Catholic opinion, that of all the instances commonly alleged as similar, there are none which can properly be called a satisfaction by vicarious punishment ; and the amount of the deduction is this : The imperfect knowledge, which every human lawgiver has of the circumstances of the case, disquali- fies him from judging how far the ends of punishment may be attained by substitution, so that it is wiser for him to follow the established course of justice which lays the punishment upon the transgressor : and in capital punishments the law of nature forbids substitution ; because no warmth of afiection, and no apprehension of utility, Avar- rant a man voluntarily to sacrifice that life which is the gift of God to him, merely that another who deserved to die might live. For these reasons I said, that in eve^y thing which seems to approach to a substitution amongst men, there is wanting that concurrence of the acceptance of the lawgiver, and the consent of the substitute, without which substitution is illegal. But these two circumstances meet in 440 POCTKINE OF THE ATONEMENT. the substitution of Christ ; and it is this peculiar concurrence which forms the complete vindication of the Catholic opinion. Jesus Christ was capable of giving his consent to sailer and to die for the sins of men, because he had that power over his life which a mere man cannot have. Death did not come upon him by the con- dition of his being ; but having existed from all ages in the form of God, he assumed, at a particular season, the fashion of a man, for this very cause that he might suffer and die. All the parts of his sutfer- ings were known to him before he visited this world ; he saw the consequences of them both to mankind and to himself; and, with every circumstance fully in his view, he said unto his Father, as it is written in the volume of God's book concerning him, " Lo ! I come to do thy will, 0 God !"* His own words mark most explicitly that he had that power over his life which a mere man has not ; " No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it down of myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again ;"f and upon this power, peculiar to Jesus, depends the signiiicancy of that expression which his Apostles use concerning him, "he gave iiimself for us," i. e. with a valid deliberate consent he acted in all that he suffered as our substitute. It affords a favourable view of the consistency of the Catholic opinion, that tiie very same dignity of character, which qualified the substitute to give his consent, implies the strongest reasons for the acceptance of the Lawgiver, — the other circumstance which must concur in order to render vicarious suffering a satisfaction to justice. The support, which the human nature of Jesus received from his divine, enabled him to sustain that wrath which the Lawgiver saw meet to lay upon a person who was bearing the sins of the world. The exalted character of the sufferer exhibited to the rational creation the evil and heinousness of sin, which the Supreme Lawgiver did not choose to forgive without such a substitution ; and the love of God to the human race, which led him to accept of the sufferings of a substitute, was illustrated in the most striking manner, by his not sparing for such a purpose a person so dear to him as his own Son. Tiiese grounds of the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion, which we deduce from the character of the substitute, have no necessary connexion with some assertions which occur in many theological books. It has been said, that our sins, being committed against the infinite majesty of Heaven, deserved an infinite punishment ; that none but an infinite person could pay an equivalent, and therefore that God could not pardon sin without the sufterings of his Son. This manner of speaking, which pretends to balance one infinite against another, must be unintelligible to finite minds ; and as far as it can be understood, it appears to be unjustifiable; because it ill becomes creatures whose sphere of observation is so narrow, and whose faculties are so weak as ours, to say what God could do, or what he could not do. It has also been said, that such was the value of the suflerings of Christ, that one drop of his blood was suflicient to wash away the sins of the world. This is a manner of speaking which appears to be both presumptuous and false ; because, under the * Heb. X 7. fJohnx. 18. DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. 441 semblance of magnifying the Redeemer, it ascribes cruelty and injus- tice to the Father in the measure of sufiering which he laid upon his Son. Neither are we warranted to say, that the purpose of maldng an atonement for the sins of men contains the whole account of the sufferings of Christ; because there may be in this transaction what the Scriptures call a manifold wisdom to us unsearchable ; reasons founded upon relations to other parts of the universe, and upon the general plan of the divine government, which we have not at present the capacity of apprehending. It is of great importance to vindicate the Catholic opinion from that appearance of presumption, Avhich the language of some of its zealous friends has annexed to it. But such language is by no means essential to the statement of this opinion. We do not say what God could have done, or what were all the reasons for his doing what we think the Scriptures tell us he has done : but we say, that in the revelation which is given of the dignity of Jesus Christ, we discern both that he was capable of giving consent, and that he is such a substitute as it became the Lawgiver to accept. It appears then to follow, from what has been stated, that when the sins of the penitent are forgiven upon account of the substitution of the sufterings of Christ, the authority of the divine government is as completely vindicated as if transgressors had sutiered all the punishment which they deserved ; at the same time, the most tender compassion is displayed to the human race, so that the Supreme Lawgiver appears both merciful and just. The harmony with which the divine perfections unite in this scheme, is considered by those who hold the Catholic opinion, as a strong internal evidence, that it is the true interpretation of Scripture, For it has been often said, and it must always be repeated when this subject is discussed, that had the gospel been a simple declaration of forgiveness to all that repent, men would both have felt that a general act of indemnity, so easily pro- nounced, was an encouragement to sin ; and, instead of being deeply impressed with the richness of that grace from which it flowed, might have regarded it as an ordinary exertion of divine goodness, of the same rank with those bounties of Providence which are daily com- municated. Whereas the preparation, the solemnity, and the expense, which, according to the Catholic opinion, attended the pronouncing of this act, at once enhances the value, and guards against the abuse of it. When we behold the Son of God descending from heaven, that he might bear our sins in his body on the tree, and the forgive- ness of sins preached through the name of a crucified Saviour, we read in the charter which conveys our pardon, that there is a deep malignity in sin, and we learn to adore the kindness and love of God which, at such a price, brought us deliverance. All those declarations of the placability of the divine nature, which the Socinians quote in support of their system, are thus allowed by the Catholic opinion their full force. We say as they do, that the Lord God is merciful and gracious, and ready to forgive ; and although we contend that pardon is dispensed only upon account of the suflerings of Christ, yet, far from thinking that the love of God is in this way obscured, we hold that this manner of dispensing pardon is the brightest display of the greatness of the divine mercy. But we claim it as the peculiar advantage of the- Catholic opinion, that according to it, the display of 3N 442 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. mercy is conjoined with an exhibition of the evil of sin ; and when we advance to other parts of the subject, we say further, that fhe remedy thus procured is dispensed and applied in a manner wisely calculated to give the most effectual check to those abuses, of which so striking an instance of the divine compassion is susceptible. Section II. We have seen that, from the nature of the thing, nothing exactly similar to vicarious punishment is to be found in the transactions of men with one another. But if vicarious punishment is the foundation of the gospel remedy, that analogy which, from other circumstances, we know to pervade all the dispensations of rehgion from the be- gimiing of the world, leads us to expect, in the previous intercourse between man and his Creator, some intimation of this method of saving sinners. As soon as we turn our attention to this subject, we are struck with the universal use of sacrifice. A worshipper bringing an animal to be slain at the altar of his God, presents an obvious re- semblance, which has been eagerly laid hold of by those who defend the doctrine of pardon by substitution ; and yet you will find, that much discussion and an accurate discrimination are necessary, before any sound and clear argument in favour of that doctrine can be war- rantably drawn from this general practice. For, in the first place, many of the sacrifices of the heathen Avere merely eucharistical ex- pressions of gratitude for blessings received, or festivals in honour of the deity worshipped by the sacrifice, at which he was supposed to be present, and in which it was conceived by the vulgar that he par- took. Even the votive and propitiatory sacrifices, i. e. those which expressed a wish of the worshipper, and his earnest desire to obtain the favour of the deity, may be considered as only a method of suppli- cation, in which a solemn action accompanied the words that were used ; or as a bribe, by which the worshipper, presenting Avhat Avas most precious in his own sight, solicited the protection of his god. But, in the second place, although there Avere sacrifices among the heathen which approached nearer to the notion of a substitution, it is not certain whether they were of divine or of human original. To some the universality and the nature of the practice taken together appear to furnish a strong presumption, or even a clear proof, that it was in the beginning commanded by God ; whilst others think, that by attending to the state of the mind under the influence of religious emotions, and to the early mode of speaking by action, a reasonable and natural account can be given of the introduction and progress of sacrifice, without having recourse to the authority of the Creator and there are many to whom it appears a strange method of defend- ing a peculiar doctrine of revelation, to have recourse to a practice, which, although it originated in sentiments dictated to all men by particular situations, and might at first be innocent and expressive, is known to have degenerated in process of time, not, merely into a frivolous service, but into cruel and shocking rites. I know few subjects upon which more has been written to less DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 443 purpose, than the origin of sacrifices. Tlie only facts which are certainly known with regard to tliis subject are the following. No command to offer sacrifice is found in the book of Genesis. Yet Cain and Abel, the two first sons of Adam, brought offerings to the Lord, and the offering of Abel was of the firstlings of his flock. ^ Job, who is not supposed to have been acquainted with the books of Moses, offered burnt-ofierings according to the number of his sons ;t and all the nations of the earth, of whom it is at least doubtful whether their religion was derived from the Mosaic law, introduced sacrifices into the ceremonial of their worship. Now these facts are so few, and they run back into a period of which we know so little, and in Avhich they are so naked of circumstancss, that it is possible for men of ingenuity and fancy, to give a plausible appearance to any kind of reasoning upon them, and thus to accommodate their opinion of the origin of sacrifices, to the general system of their opinions upon other subjects. I should so very far out of my province, if I entangled myself in the labyrinth opinions upon this problematical subject. But there are two points, totally independent of any of the particular systems that have been formed concerning it, which it appears to me of much im- portance for those who defend the Catholic opinion to carry along ■with them. The one is, that amidst the multiplicity of heathen sacri- fices, there were some in which the people understood that the victim was substituted in place of the offerer, and suftered the whole or a part of the punishment which the offerer deserved. I do not inquire into the origin of this kind of sacrifices, because whatever were the steps by which they were introduced, and whether they were the earliest or the latest sacrifices, it remains equally true that they were known and used by ancient nations, and that this is a fact of which the classics furnish the most abundant and various evidence. The anger of the gods, excited by some transgression, and signified by prodigies or calamities, was supposed to be averted by sacrifices, which for this reason were called averriuica, i. e. iram divinmn avertentia. This was implied in the action of the worshipper, when he presented such sacrifices, viz : his laying his hands upon the head of the victim while he confessed his sins, and uttered the solennia verba : and the same thing is expressed in these words of Ovid, "hanc animam vobis pro meliore damns;" J and of Horace, mactata veniet lenior hostia ;" § and in terms often used by Livy upon such occasions, "pacem exposcere deum."|| As the animal was supposed to bear the anger due to tliB offerer, it was believed that the more precious the victim, and the more nearly connected with the oflerer, the gods would the more certainly be appeased. Hence arose the splendid hecatombs of which we read in Homer ; and hence too the human sacrifices, and the offering of children by their own parents, of which we read amongst many nations. Thus Caesar says of the Gauls, " pro vita hominum nisi vita hominis reddatur, non posse aliter Deorum immortalium numen placari arbitrantur."1[ Justin says of the Carthagenians, " homines ut victimas immolabant, et impuberes * Gen. iv. 3, 4. j- Job i. 5. + Ovid. Fast. vi. 162. § Hor. Carm. i. 19. |1 Liv. iii. 7. ^ Css. De B. G. vi. 16. 444 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. — aris admovebant, pacem Deorum sanguine eorum exposcentes."* The following lines of Virgil show, that the idea of a victim suftering for the sins of another was familiar to the poet and his countrymen. They are put into the mouth of Simon, who, pretending to have escaped out of the hands of the Greeks, by whom he had been destined for the altar, is brought before Priam. Nee mihi jam palriam antiquam spes ulla videndi, Nee dulees natos exoptatumque parentem : Quos illi fors ad poenas ob nostra reposeent Eflugia, et culpam hanc miserorum morte piabuntf No words can mark more significantly the nature and the effect of vicarious suffering, than the beautiful lines in which Juvenal describes the act of the Decii, in devoting themselves to death for their coun- try ; an act which Livy had ca.\led piacu him omnis Deorum irae.X 391 Plebeiae Deciorum animae, plebeia fuerunt Nomina : pro totis legionibus hi tamen, et pro Omnibus auxiliis, atque omni plebe Latina, Suffieiunt Disinfernis, Terraeque parenti : Pluris enim Decii, quam qui servantur ab illis.§ The second point which may be gathered from the heathen sacri- fices, independently of any speculation with regard to the origin of sacrifice, is intimately connected with the first. It is this: as the practice of substituting a victim to bear the wrath due to the offerer was nearly universal, an idea which could not fail to become so fami- liar to the minds of all men, was everywhere expressed, so tliat in the languages of all nations, there are found various words which were significant of this idea, and the meaning of which evaporates, if you throw it aside. Every language must be interpreted accord- ing to the sentiments and customs of those who used it. Whether these sentiments and customs be founded in nature or in prejudice, is a matter of another consideration : but since the persons amongst whom they prevailed spoke according to their views of things, we speak unintelligibly, or with a design to mislead, if we employ their words without recollecting their ideas ; and when we profess to in- terpret ancient books, we err against the first rules of criticism, if, instead of adopting the interpretation suggested by ancient manners, Ave attempt to bend the words which occur there, to ideas which we may believe to be right, but which we must acknowledge to be new. It is known to every classical scholar, that in the language of the best Greek writers ayof denotes a crime, which was to be expiated by a sacrifice ; that o^wfco and ayiccia presents the outlines of the body from which it proceeds. Tvrtoj is a mark made upon an object by striking it; an impression; John xx. 25, tov tvTiov tiov yjXi^v; hence the likeness of the striking body which remains in the body struck ; in general, a figure or representation. Heb. ix. 9-14. — 9, rta^aSo^ri, collocatio, placing two things by the side of one another, in order to observe their points of resemblance and dissimilitude ; such a representation of the things that were to come, as it was proper for persons living in that time to have before them. — 10. " Carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation;" /. e. ordinances which had the effect of making a per- son righteous before God, in respect of the flesh, but did not reach the conscience, lying upon them, imposed, till the fit season of making things right by another covenant. — 11. " A tabernacle not made with hands ;" /. e. not in the manner in which the tent of Moses was made. This is a circumlocution by which, the apostle gives notice that he is using the phrase figuratively for the body of Christ. — 13. The water of separation, mentioned in Numbers xix. was thus obtained. A red heifer was killed and burnt ; the ashes were gathered and kept in a clean place ; and some of the ashes were put into a vessel and running water added to them. A bunch of hyssop dipped in this water was employed to sprinkle every person, who upon any account had touched a dead body, before he was permitted to approach the taber- nacle. Every thing that was separated from other uses for the service of God was by that separation holy. Every thing that was employed for the ordinary purposes of life was, by this common use, unfit for the service of God. Hence xowo^, impure ; xoivou,, polhio. The sprink- ling with hyssop did not make the person a better man than he was, or obtain remission of his sins ; it only removed that accidental defile- ment, or unfitness for the service of God which he had contracted. — 14. 5ta tov u.viv|.^o.toi aiwriov. The Holy Ghost is represented throughout the New Testament as having a part in all the actions of our I^ord ; — as given to him without measure, — and as descending upon him at his baptism. It is said that our Lord was led by the Spirit, — that by the Spirit of God he did mighty works, — that he was raised, quickened, justified by the Spirit. So here the Spirit supported him in his sacri- fice on the cross. Every victim was required by the law to be blame- less. He was without sin. The Avater of separation purified from the touch of a dead man. His offering purified from dead works, or those sins which defile the conscience. Heb. ix. 21-24. xntov^yia., public service. — 22. '5;tf5of, "Almost all DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 459 things are by the law purged with blood." Poor persons were allowed, upon some occasions, to bring offerings in which no animal was slain. a:"?'5' referring to that expression in the law, " Rlood maketh atonement for the soul." — 24. avtitvrta in 1 Pet. iii. 21, means what we call the antitype ; here, the type or impression representing another thing. Heb. X. 11-18. — In this passage the apostle argues from the nature of the offerings under the law, and from the daily repetition of them, that they did not take away sin ; and he quotes the ancient Scriptures, which promised forgiveness of sin as one of the blessings of the new covenant, in proof of the perfection of the sacrifice offered under that covenant. The passages above referred to suggest the following remarks, which are so clearly grounded upon the words and the reasonings of the apostle, that I think it enough barely to mention them without adding any illustration. 1. The apostle ascribes a certain effect to the Jewish sacrifices, which he calls purifying the flesh, and which we find it easy to interpret by our knowledge of the Mosaic law. 2. This effect was attained by the shedding the blood of those victims which were offered day by day, and year by year, according to the com- mandment of God, and by the priests sprinkling the blood upon the altar. 3. An effect of a very superior kind is said to be attained under the Gospel, which the apostle calls purifying the conscience, making the worshippers perfect, and which he explains by the remis- sion of sins. 4. In describing these two effects, he uses the two words xaOa^iS^u, and a.yi.a^u,, whicli, in the language of ancient Greece, denoted what we call expiation by sacrifice. 5. Agreeably to this received meaning of these words, he represents the superior effect as attained by the one sacrifice for sins, which the High Priest of our profession offered, when he gave his body on the cross once for all ; and by his carrying his own blood into heaven. 6. And he repre- sents the manner of attaining the inferior effect, as intended by God to be a shadow, a figure, a type of that manner of attaining the supe- rior effect which had from the beginning entered into the councils of heaven, and with a view to which all the services that pertained to the inferior effect had been established according to the pattern shown to Moses. When we lay these parts of the apostle's argument together, this conclusion seems clearly to follow, that in his apprehension the offer- ing of Christ upon the cross was a true sacrifice for sin, which has as real an influence in procuring the forgiveness of sin, and so relieving the conscience from a sense of guilt, as the sacrifices under the law had in removing those legal defilements which rendered men unfit to approach the tabernacle. As this conclusion is the most direct confirmation of the Catholic opinion, the Socinians have employed all their ingenuity to evade the necessity of drawing it ; and their reasonings upon this subject, as far as I have been able to collect them, may be reduced to the two follow- ing heads : — 1. They say that the whole language and reasoning of the apostle to the Hebrews is merely an allusion to Jewish customs ; that it was natural for an apostle of Jesus, who had been bred at the feet of 460 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Gamaliel, to endeavour to avail himself of the education, in which he tells us he had profited above his equals, in order to do honour to the new faith which he had embraced ; that in all his writings Paul discovers a propensity to use bold figures of speech, and that there was a peculiar propriety in the figure which pervades this Epistle, because it tended to magnify the religion of Jesus in the eyes of those to whom he was writing. Men, who had been accustomed to rever- ence the splendour of the Mosaic institution, could not instantly be reconciled to the simplicity and spirituality of the faith of Christ. The apostle, therefore, decking out the gospel in trappings borrowed from the law, presents to the Hebrews, a sacrifice, a tabernacle, and a High Priest : and althougii he knew that the only effect of the death of Christ is to furnish motives for that repentance, the consequence of which is forgiveness, he accommodates the sacrificial terms of the law, to give this effect a more venerable appearance. The prejudices of the Jews were soothed by this accommodation ; but it was not intend- ed for other Christians ; and we miss the design of a writer, whose principle it was to become all tilings to all men, if we form our notions of the gospel from a manner of expressing himself, which condescen- sion to persons of a particular denomination led him to assume. This account of the Epistle to the Hebrews cannot proceed from persons who entertain an exalted idea of the inspiration of Scripture. It is indeed inconsistent with the lowest degree of inspiration which can be supposed necessary to render the Scriptures a safe guide into all truth. The account is incorrect in representing this view of the connexion between the sacrifices of the law and the sacrifice of the crosS; as peculiar to the Epistle to the Hebrews ; for although particu- lar circumstances led the writer of that epistle to give a fuller illustra- tion of the subject than is elsewhere to be found, yet we discover traces of the same connexion, both in the law itself, and in different places of the New Testament ; and there is not the smallest incon- sistency between all that is said by this writer and any thing that is said in any other part of Scripture. The account is dishonourable to this writer, because it represents him as arguing falsely, and using both words and reasonings with an intention to mislead. You will be satisfied of the dishonour which this account does to the writer of the epistle, if you attend to the following circumstances : — 1. The words xa^at^co and ayta^"» which had a received meaning in the sacrifices of those nations to whose language they belong, are applied by the apostle, according to that sense, to the sacrifices under the law ; and in the same discourse they are applied to the effects of the death of Christ. But there cannot be a greater abuse of figurative language than to employ words, first literally, then metaphorically, and in the progress of a long argument often to alternate, the literal and the metaphorical sense of them, without giving any notice of the change. 2. But the purport of the apostle's argument does not admit of our understanding these words metaphorically. Whatever were the motives which led the apostle to argue in this manner, it is unques- tionably the purport of his argument to show, that Christ is a high priest, that his death was an offering, and that this offering attained the end of sacrifice. Now, such an argument requires the use of the DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 461 words xa^at^co and ayiafu, not in a metaphorical, but in the literal sense , for if these words apply to the sacrifices of the law literally, and to the sacrifice of Christ metaphorically, then the whole argument is a sophism, and the apostle is guilty of something much worse than an abuse of figures, he is a false reasoner. 3. The apostle says expressly, that the sacrifices under the law were shadows, figures, types of the true sacrifice of the cross ; i. e. instead of applying the words xaOai^u and aytafw, in allusion to the law, he maintains that the truth of the terms is found under the gospel, and that the law was an allusion to this truth. You will observe, that as a shadow must present the outlines of the body from which it pro- ceeds, as a fDrtof , in the primary sense of that word, must express the figure of that body by the stroke of which it was formed ; so in the use which we are accustomed to make of the words type and antitype, there must be a resemblance between them, because it is by means of this resemblance that the one thing becomes the type of the other. What we call a symbol is an arbitrary sign of something past or pre- sent, whose meaning depends upon invention ; and we understand that any one thing may be made the sign of another, as sounds of thought, and written characters of sounds. But what we call a type is a sign of something future, whose nature is expressive of the thing typified ; and there could be no connexion between the two, if the tiling typified were destitute of that which is characteristical of the type. Hence, when we say the Jewish sacrifices were typical of the Messiah, we mean by the use of the word typical, that their nature somehow corresponded to the design of his coming. Had they attained the end of sacrifice completely, there would have been no need for his becoming a sacrifice ; had they not attained it in any measure, they would not have been types of his sacrifice ; but by purifying the flesh, i. e. rendering it lawful and safe for persons to approach the tabernacle, who, from legal uncleanness, or sins of ignorance, could not have approached it without death, and yet leav- ing the consciences of the worshippers in the same state as before, they were in their nature fitted to typify, ?. e. to exhibit, by an imperfect resemblance, that sacrifice which relieves the conscience, and by which " all that believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses." The logical propriety of terms, therefore, requires that we ascribe a certain effect to the Jewish sacrifices, and that we ascribe a higher effect of the same kind to the sacrifice of the cross. But this is the very thing which the apostle does ; for we found by an analysis of his argument, that he speaks of both effects as real. And thus, if we only give the words xo^atgu and ayia^u, in his discourse the same interpretation which we are accustomed to give them in the writings of the ancient Greeks, he appears to be strictly accurate in the use of the term rvxai; ; whereas, if we give these two words a new interpretation, by which Ave malce him guilty of an abuse of figurative language, and a kind of folse reasoning, we also fix upon him the absurdity, that he calls one thing a type of another, although the thing typified wants that which is characteristical of the type ; so that the type mentioned by the apostle, instead of being an imperfect representation, has more than the antitype ; and the things to which these names are applied 41* 462 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. have not that resemblance in kind, without which the names have no meaning. 4. To all that has been said, it must be added, in the last place, that the apostle is not here handling an argument, but he is address- ing a great body of people, converted from Judaism to Christianity ; and he professes to relieve their minds from the apprehension of im- piety in forsaking the law of Moses, by stating, that all the sacrifices which had been offered for ages according to the law were superseded by that one sacrifice on the cross, which, being the truth shadowed forth by them, rendered further offering unnecessary. The argument was most satisfying to those Jews who received it upon the authority of the apostle. But if he only spoke in accommodation to their pre- judices, he dealt unfairly with them ; because whenever they disco- vered, by their intercourse with other Christians, that the death of Christ was in reality no sacrifice, the scruples which the apostle had professed to remove would naturally revive ; and since he had as- sumed it as a principle, that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, it will appear to them their safest course to return to that religion in which they certainly knew that blood made an atonement for the soul. This last reason is stated in its full force in a passage of this epistle, xiii. 9 — 14 ; in reading which it must be remembered, that the cere- monies of the law were familiar to the persons whom the apostle is addressing ; that he combats teachers who endeavoured to draw them back from the simplicity of the gospel, to the observance of these ceremonies ; and that his epistle was written about eight years before the destruction of Jerusalem. From these four reasons it seems to follow, that, unless we hold the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews to be both an inconclusive and a sophistical reasoner, we cannot admit the first position, by which the Socinians endeavour to evade the argument in favour of the Catholic opinion drawn from that epistle ; but we must consider the manner in which the Jewish sacrifices are there spoken of as involv- ing this principle, that the offering on the cross did efficaciously take away sin by the substitution of a victim for the sinner. 2. But if it should be found impossible to resolve the reasoning of the apostle into a bare accommodation to Jewish customs, or a moral lesson, — if there must be something substantial in that which the Mosaic ritual shadowed forth, a second position is adopted by those who deny the truth of the Catholic opinion. It is the refuge to which the early followers of Socinus betook themselves, in order to evade the reality of the sacrifice of the cross ; and it coincides with that which I called the middle opinion concerning the nature of the gos- pel remedy. They said that under the law the priest made the atonement ; that it was not the victim, which was of little value, and was slain by the offerer himself, but the oblation of the victim by the priest, which procured forgiveness ; and that on the great day of atonement, the most important part of the ceremony was the high priest entering into the holy of holies, and appearing before the mercy-seat for the people. They learned from the Epistle to the Hebrews, that these typical parts of the law were fulfilled by the priesthood of Christ ; DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 463 they found the apostle stating tlie superior excellence ot his priest- hood as consisting in this, that he went not into the holy place made with hands, but into the true holy place, L e. heaven, there to appear in the presence of God for us ; and they understood the apostle as saying that it is his entering there which makes him a priest ; for so they interpreted these words, Heb. viii. 4, " If he were on earth he should not be a priest." Upon these grounds they conceived that the priesthood of Christ commenced when he ascended to heaven, and that he is said to be a priest for ever upon this account only, because he continues without intermission, through his power and favour with God, to take away the guilt of our sins. The amount, then, of the second position isj that Christ was not truly a priest, and that lie did not oHer any real sacrifice while he was upon earth ; but that his suf- ferings were merely a preparation for his priesthood which is exer- cised in heaven. The imperfection of this system is obvious to any person \vho carries the whole subject in his mind. The priests indeed made atonement, but it was by the blood of the victim which had been slain. The high priest entered in once a year into the lioly place, but it was with the blood of the goat and the bullock, both of which he had on that day slain with his own hand ; and he reconciled the holy place by sprinkling it with the blood. " Every high priest taken from among men," says the apostle, Heb. viii. 3, 4, " is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sin ; wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to ofter." Jesus then performed the office of a priest in offering a sacrifice, but he did not complete the office by that act ; for, in order to fulfil the types of the law, it was necessary that he should carry the blood which he had offered into the holy place. Upon this account he went into heaven ; and this is the meaning of these words of the apostle, " If he were on earth he should not be a priest," i. e. if he had remained on earth after his sacrifice, no part of his actions would have corresponded to the entrance of the high priest into the holy place. But his appearance in heaven is stated, in various places of the Epistle, as subsequent to his sacrifice, and as deriving its efficacy from the blood which he has carried thither. We are led to consider him as completely a priest, because there are in his case both the mactation and the oblation of a victim ; and the nature of the victim is conjoined with the place where it continues to be pre- sented to God, in all the views of the excellence of his priesthood. Thus, according to our interpretation of the apostle's reasoning, every part of the Mosaic ritual finds its accomplishment in the priest- hood of Christ, and the analogy between the two dispensations is so entire and so exact, that we are satisfied of the truth of the whole reasoning. According to that system which is adopted in the second position, a large portion of the ceremonial of Jewish sacrifice has no counterpart under the gospel ; Jesus bears the name of a priest without having done wiiat is characteristical of that office ; and that method of procuring the blessings of the gospel, which the Scriptures reveal, is confounded with the power and the tenderness which the High Priest of our profession exhibits in dispensing them. 464 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Section V. The argument upon which we have dwelt so largely appears to me conclusive. But it is not desirable that so important an article of our faith as that which the Catholic opinion involves, should rest upon a single view of the subject, or upon the pertinency of a particular kind of phraseology ; and therefore, in order to show that this opinion is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, and that the phrases employed in stating it, although not used by the inspired writers, are clearly warranted by the revelation which they have given, it is proper to take a more enlarged survey of the language and the views upon this subject which the Scriptures present. We shall meet in this survey with some of the sacrificial terms which we have lately been considering; but if we find, that even when a re- semblance to the Jewish ritual was not the leading idea, the amount of what the inspired writers say concerning the gospel remedy is per- fectly agreeable to the Catholic opinion, we may rest without hesita- tion in the conclusion which they taught us to draw from that resemblance. It is known to those who search the Scriptures, that the discourses of our Lord and the writings of his apostles abound with allusions to passages in the Old Testament, even when no express quotation is made ; and therefore it is not surprising to find in one passage the ground-work of all that we read in the New Testament concerning the doctrine of atonement. That passage is Isaiah liii. The prophet, in many places of his book, blends with the description of the Mes- siah's kingdom events of his own time, as types of that glorious period ; but in this chapter he appears to have lost sight of every inferior personage, and his mind is completely occupied with the illustrious deliverer that was to come to Zion, particularly with the nature, the character, and the effects of his sufferings. The ancient Jews understood this chapter to refer to the Messiah, although they certainly did not enter into the true meaning of all the parts of it. But to us it is interpreted by the manner in which the writers of the New Testament relate those events which the prophets there foretold; and when we avail ourselves of the light which his predic- tion and their commentary throw upon one another, we are enabled to arrange that support which the Catholic opinion derives from the general language and the views of Scripture, under the three follow- ing heads : — the bitterness of the sufferings of Christ taken in conjunc- tion with the innocence and dignity of the sufferer ; — the character uniformly given of his sufferings as a punishment for sin ; — and the various descriptions of the effects of this punishment. These three points, collected from Scripture in one complex view, constitute the evidence, that the doctrine of pardon by the substitution of the suffer- ings of Christ in place of the punishment due to sinners is the doctrine of Scripture. 1. The first point to be attended to is what may be called the value of the sufferings of Christ ; because had they been of little value, they could not have answered that purpose which is assigned to them in DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 465 the Catholic opinion. I need not particularly quote the well-known texts of Scripture, which place this value in the bitterness of the sufferings cheerfully undergone by an innocent and exalted person. The whole history of his life is a commentary upon the significant words of the prophet, " He is a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;" for he was not a stranger to any kind of affliction, and, in the hour of his greatest distress, every alleviation was removed from him. To the meanness of his condition, the scorn and persecution of his enemies, the pains of his body, and all the visible circumstances by which death to him was aggravated, there falls to be added what the New Testament calls an agony, which is described, Mark xiv. 33, 34; Luke xxii. 41 — 44; John xii. 27. In these passages we meet with the following terms, yivoi.i(voi iv aywta ; ■^vx*; l^ov ■ffta^axtut,; rtf^iXvrtoj fwj ^rarou; sxeaixStiaeat, to be amazed, or in that state of mind which we express by the word horror; to be astonished, stupified with grief: to lose for a little the power of exercising the mind ; aSrjfiomv, extra jjopiili con.sortiu7n degere, hominum vestigia vitare, to have the mind stupified and absorbed in its own feelings. The expressions used by the historians paint the utmost distress of mind, during which the human nature of Jesus shrunk at the prospect that lay before him ; and the apostle,4o the Hebrews manifestly refers to their description when he says, Heb. v. 7, " Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications, with strong crying ,and tears "Those who consider Jesus as merely a man, and who by consequence must consider his sufferings as no atonement for sin, find it impossible to give a reasonable account why, in the prospect of death, an event which to him surely was no great evil, he should discover an agitation of mind, so unlike that firmness which many other men have displayed in circumstances to outward appearance exactl}^ similar. But those who hold the Catholic opinion consider this agony as the fulfilment of the words of Isaiah liii. 10, " It pleased the Lord to bruise him ;" and of these words, Isaiah Ixiii. 3, where the Messiah says of himself, " I have trodden the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none with me." They connect this agonj'' with the words spoken by Jesus on the cross, " My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?" and although they presume not to explain in what it consisted, yet as they believe that the wrath of God due to the sins of the world was laid immediately upon Jesus, they find no difficulty in conceiving that his spirit, left without the wonted measure of support and comfort which it derived from its union . with the Word and from the presence of his Father, experienced a darkness and desertion in comparison with which all the sorrow that man can inflict is light. Some have applied to this agony that article of the creed, " he descended into heU." But as we know that these words meant, according to the sense of those who first introduced them into the creed, that the soul of Jesus went into the region of departed spirits at the time when his body was laid in the grave, so if we believe there is no such region, we are not warranted by the language of Scripture to apply to the sufferings of Christ an expres- sion which will seem to us to convey that they were the same in kind as the punishment of the damned. Whatever was the nature of the agony which shook and troubled 3 Q "i^Q DOCTRINE or THE ATONEMENT. the spirit of Jesus, it was connected with entire resignation. He said in tile time of it, " Not as I will, but as thou wilt ; for this cause came I to this hour :" and at all other times lie spoke of his sufferings with a readiness to encounter them, which magnifies his character, and adds to their value. The innocence of Jesus was illustrated by his sufferings ; for as the prophet Isaiah had said, liii. 8, 9, according to Bishop Lowth's translation, " he was taken away by an oppressive judgment ;" " he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth ;" so it appeared upon the trial which he underwent, that all the malice of his enemies could not convict him of sin. One of his companions on the cross, while he acknowledged that he himself received the just reward of his deeds, declared of Jesus tliat he had done nothing amiss ; and the disciple who betrayed him, after having been intimately acquainted with his private as well as his public life,' is introduced in the gospels repenting of his foul deed, and bearing the most unexceptionable testimony to his Master, in these words, '• I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood." In this manner does the New Testament place the innocence of Jesus fully in our view, at the very time when it describes his sufferings. But it represents him as much more than innocent ; for, as I stated formerly in relation to the importance of the doctrine of the Hypostatical Union, the general strain of the New Testament leads us to conjoin the peculiar value which is there affixed to the sufferings of Jesus with the peculiar dignity of his person ; and we can clearly discern, in those purposes of the incarnation of the Son of God which the Scriptures declare, the reason why they have dwelt so largely upon the divinity of his character. Thus his condescension is said to con- sist in this, that he who was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God, humbled himself, and became obedient to the death of the cross ;* "hereby perceive we," says John, " the love of God, because he laid down his life for us ;"t the love of the Father is commended to us in different places, by his giving his only begotten Son, his beloved Son, and delivering him to the death for us ; and Jesus is never classed with martyrs or other righteous men, who " loved not their lives unto the death ;" but the apostles, in speaking of his blood, affix to it a preciousness infinitely beyond that of any blood which ever was shed. 2. The second point to be collected from a general survey of the language and the views of Scripture is this, that the sufferings of Christ, the peculiar bitterness of which derived such a value from the innocence and dignity of the sufferer, are not stated as mere calamity, but are always described under the characters which belong to a punishment of sin. God is never represented as exercising in the sufferings of his Son that right of sovereignty which belongs to the Lord and Proprietor of all, but as inflicting what was due to the transgression of liis law ; and Jesus Christ, who is essentially distin- guished from all other men in this respect, that he did not know sin, is represented in these sufferings as bearing the sins of others. The different expressions by which this character of the sufferings of Christ is intimated may be reduced to two general classes : * Phil. ii. 6—8. j IJohn iii, 16. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 467 1. The first includes all the prepositions in the Greek language that are employed to mark substitution. As it is said by Isaiah " he was wounded for our transgressions," so it is said in the New Testa- ment that " he was delivered for our offences, that he died for us, that he suffered for sins, the just for the unjust.''* These expressions certainly suggest the notion of a substitution, in which the sufferings and death of one person are instead of the sufferings and death whicli the sins of others deserved. But Socinus has led the way to all who hold any part of his system, in attempting to elude this notion, by saying, that Christ's suffering for sins means nothing more than his suffering for this end, that we might be led to forsake our sins ; and that his dying for us only means his dying for our advantage. No person who is accustomed to study language, will assert in answer to this interpretation, that for necessarily implies substitution, because every scholar knows that even when he is able to ascertain the primary meaning of a preposition, he often finds that primary mean- ing so qualified by the words with which the preposition is joined, that in different situations it appears totally different. We say in English, Christ suffered for sins, and Christ suffered for us ; but every one understands the preposition for to have different meanings in these two phrases. We explain the first, Christ suffered upon account of sins ; the second, Christ suffered instead of the sinners. And this ambiguity is not peculiar to the English ; in Greek also the same pre- position vTite, is employed to express these different ideas ; for we read, 1 Pet. ii. 21,2 Cor. v. 15, x^tai^oj s rtai9f r, artf^aj/f i/ v^f^ j^iuw ; 1 Cor. XV, 3, a.TCiBaviv vTiie, I'M!/ aua^t'i.ui' /yjucoi/. The propcr meaning of vTue, is over, above. It suggests primarily the notion of covering ; and this may be applied, either to the covering a person from danger, or the cover- ing a thing from sight. The phrase vrtte, jy^twi' may denote any kind of benefit which we derive from another person ; but it marks with peculiar fitness \\\s sustaining that harm which we should have sustained, had we not been covered by him. It cannot be denied that classical writers use vme^ in situations where a substitution is plainly implied ; and the Scriptures intimate that there is a peculiar emphasis in the application of this preposition to the sufferings of Christ. For although the apostle Paul, Col. i. 24, speaks of fois rta5)7fia(^t juov ii7t«^ i-ucov, yet he asks, 1 Cor. i. 13, |U»: iiaiXo;f(jT'ar^w9>7 iJrtf^rfioi/; intimating, that even although his enemies should crucify him, his crucifixion could not give him that kind of connexion with Christians which arose from the crucifixion of Christ. In the other phrase, ■i'rtt^ d^to^rtwi', vHte, cannot denote advantage ; and without a violent ellipsis it cannot be under- stood of the final cause; for the end of Christ's sufferings was not our sins, but the remission of our sins. But it is naturally imderstood, according to a frequent use of this preposition, of what we call the antecedent cause; that cause which, having a previous existence, produces an action. Sins existed before Christ died, and their demerit produced his sufterings ; therefore it is said, a.niBa.vtv vnte, afia^tiuv, as we read in Isocrates, '^f^ Lv Sovtfi •rot; ^totj Stxaj,* and often in luVit'w,pro injuriis ulcisci. The antecedent cause is expressed in * Kom. IV. 25 ; v. 8. 1 Pet. iii. 18. f Isoc. Plat. p. 716. Edit. BasiL 468 BOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. different places of Isaiah liii. by the preposition ^ta, the preposition most commonly used in that sense. Et^avfiati-aOr; 8i,a tas aiA-a^Ha^ t^fxMv — bi,a ra; aio^ttcaj avtav rta^idoOr; ; and the apostle Paul appears to have copied this expression, Rom. iv. 25 ; yet, in that very verse, ^m is also used to mark the final cause ; for while our ofl'ences were the antecedent cause which produced the sufferings of Christ, our justification is the end obtained by his resurrection, n^^t is also used in the Greek Testament for this purpose, as Rom. viii. 3; 1 Peter iii. 18. nf^i ai.ia^tiMv means, in relation to our sins ; and the nature of the relation is to be gathered from the Septuagint, where what is rendered in our English Bible, " he shall bring for his sin which he hath sinned," runs in the Greek, otati rfs^t rj^j aixa^tMi jjj wH'^^- This expression, therefore, is one of the many instances in which the New Testament leads us back to the sacrifices of the law. There is one Greek preposition yet remaining, avth which our Lord himself uses, Matt. xx. 28 ; from whence the apostle Paul, 1 Tim. ii. 6, probably formed the compound word avtavt^ov. It is well known that avti, which perfectly expresses that one thing is set over against another, conveys the nature of commutation, substitution, succession ; and it was impossible to find any preposition which could have marked more precisely this idea, that the life of Christ is given instead of many. Even a-vth however, may be used by the best writers in a looser sense, for the advantage of; and no scholar would choose to rest an important article of faith upon the strict acceptation of a pre- position. We do not therefore argue, that because we find v^f^, Sta, and avn employed upon this subject, the Catholic opinion is unques- tionably the doctrine of Scripture. But we maintain, that if there was in the death of Christ a substitution of his sufferings for the pun- ishment of sin, it could not have been more naturally or significantly expressed than by these prepositions ; and that the meaning which a reader whose mind is unwarped by system feels himself disposed to affix to them, and the violent interpretations which are necessary in order to evade that meaning, create a strong presumption in favour of the truth of this opinion. 2. But there is a second class of expressions in Scripture, in which that character of a punishment for sin which seems to be signified by the use of these prepositions, is directly applied to the sufferings of Christ. Isaiah, after having said " he was wounded for our transgressions, and he was bruised for our iniquities," adds, "rtai5«a ti^^r^vyji sh' avtov, fcp ftwxojrtt ttvrov ij^ifts laOtjusv ; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, by his stripes we are healed." Again, "ai/owfi, he shall bear their iniquities, avrjvcyxs, he bare the sin of many." This language of the prophet is copied, 1 Peter ii. 24, and it is referred to, Heb. ix. 28. The significancy of the preposition ava in the compound verb avt^vcyxs lies in this, that as Jesus was lifted up on the cross, he may be said to have carried our sins upward Avhen he bore them ; and that this cir- cumstance was attended to in the use of this compound verb appears not improbable, when we find the apostle, Heb. vii. 27, applying the same verb aro^fgw first to the sacrifices of the law which were lifted upon the altar, and then to the offering of Christ upon the cross. There are two ways in which Socinus and his followers endeavour DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 469 to evade the force of the expression avi^viyxtv dfia^ttoj. They admit that according to the usnal sense of the verb the phrase is properly ren- dered as in our translation, "he bare our sins." But they say that, as the nature of the thing does not admit of a Uteral translation, we are to consider the phrase as equivalent to another which is used in different places by the apostle John, "his taking away sins," i. e. his leading us to forsake them. But it is a forced mode of interpreting Scripture, to have recourse to an unusual sense of a phrase, when that sense manifestly omits a part of the information given concerning the subject to which the phrase is applied. For although it be true that Jesus is said, John i. 29, 1 John iii. 5, o.i^tw a^o^tiuj, yet the precise mode of taking them away is declared to be by bearing them ; and although the scape-goat, which carried the sins of the children of Israel into the wilderness on the day of atonement, may be considered as a type of Christ's taking away sin, yet the scape-goat was only one part of the ceremonies prescribed for that day ; and when all the ceremonies are laid together, if the scape-goat denoted that the sins were taken away, for the very same reason, the other goat which was killed on that day must be considered as a type of his blood being shed for sin. The other way in which Socinus and his followers endeavour to evade the force of the expression avtiviyxtv d^o^naj, is by saying that bearing our iniquities, if that translation be admitted, means nothing more than that they were the occasion of his suffering ; as a person is said in the Old Testament to bear the sins of his ancestors, when he suffers calamities in his person or his fortune, which he would not have endured if they had been innocent. But this method of evading the natural sense of the phrase by no means answers the purpose for which it is resorted to. For it may be observed in general, that that i:»art of the constitution of nature, by which posterity may be thus said to bear the sins of their ancestors, is in reality an extension of the punishment of sin, which is declared by God in the second com- mandment, " visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children." This extension of the punishment of sin demonstrates in a striking manner the painful nature of transgression, and calls in the natural affection of parents for their offspring as a guard to their own hnio- cence. In every case therefore, where bearing the sins of others is allowed to mean suffering of which these sins are the occasion, that suffering is truly the punishment of sin. But with regard to this par- ticular case, it is to be observed farther, that we are not left to sup- pose that the connexion between sin and the sutTerings of Christ was incidental, or merely the result of the general constitution of nature ; for we are taught by a variety of the most precise expressions, that this connexion was specially constituted by God, and that in it are to be fomid the reason and the intention of the sufferings of Christ. Isaiah says, " the chastisement of our peace was upon him ;" but chastisement always means suffering connected with a fault, intended either for the correction of the person who endures it, or for an ex- ample to others. As chastisement which includes death cannot be designed to correct the sufferer, and as Jesus stood in no need of cor- rection, the chastisement whicli he endured must be considered as exemplary; and its being called "the chastisement of our peace" 42 470 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. clearly means that the punishment, without which we could not be restored to peace with God, was borne by him. The same thing is more fully expressed by Isaiah, as his words are rendered by Bishop Lovvth. "The Lord made to meet upon him the iniquities of us all. It was required of him, and he was made answerable." There are two striking expressions to this purpose used by the apostle Paul. The one is in 2 Cor. v. 21. The apostle vindicates the personal innocence of his Master by saying, that he did not know sin. At the same time, in order to show that he was counted and treated as a sinner, not merely in the judgment of men, but in the judgment and by the appointment of God, he says, that God hath made him to be sin. This most significant manner of marking the coimexion between his sufferings and sin is taken from the Septuagint, Lev. iv. 29 ; V. 9 ; where a sin-olfering is often called a.^a^-tr,ua., a.ixae,tw., because it was offered for sin ; and the Latin writers intimate the same con- nexion in a similar manner, when they wse piacuhimhoXhiox i\ie crime, piacula commissa, and for the victim by whose death the crime was supposed to be expiated. The other expression of the apostle Paul is, Gal. iii. 10, 13. The reason assigned for the kind of death which Jesus died clearly implies a substitution for sinners. The Jews employed other metliods of taking away the life of a criminal. But they did, in some cases, hang upon a tree the body of a person who had been put to death for a crime. They were forbidden by their law, however, to alknv the body to remain all night upon the tree. Deut. xxi. 22, 23. " If a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree; his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day, (for he that is hanged is accursed of God,) that thy land be not defiled." The reason of this order is plainly no part of the civil punishment ; tliat was completed by the death of the criminal, and by the infamy of his hanging upon a tree ; it is merely a declaration of the light in which the person who had suffered this civil punishment was viewed by God. The law also said, " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." All men, as transgressors of the law, were subject to this curse ; and Jesus, in order to redeem them from the curse, was made a curse for them, by hanging on a tree ; for when we consider that he who had power to lay down his life, had certainly power to choose the manner of laying it down, and that the Scriptures expressly say, " he was delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God,"* we cannot but consider his choosing to hang upon a tree, a situation declared by the ceremonial law to be accursed of God, as intended to demonstrate to the world, that although he himself continued in all things written in the law to do them, his death was not merely the infliction of human law upon an innocent man, but a suffering which in the sight of God was penal. By this variety of the most marked expressions do the Scriptures present to us the sufferings of Christ under the character of punish- ment, i. e. as suffering which could not from the nature of things, be * Acts ii. 23. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 471 the very punishment which the sinner deserved, but which was laid upon an innocent person for the sins of otliers. 3. To complete the argument in favour of the Catholic opinion which arises from a general survey of the language and views of Scripture, we have now to attend to the different classes of expres- sion by which the effects of the sufferings of Christ are described, 1. The first class comprehends all those expressions in which the words reconciliation, propitiation, atonement, and making peace, are connected with the sufferings of Christ. Of this kind are the follow- ing: Col. i. 19, 20. 1 John ii. 2: iv. 10. Rom. iii. 25; v. 11. "It pleased the Father, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself. He hath set him forth to be a propitiation throngh faith in his blood. By him we have now received the atonement." The verbs translated reconcile are xafax^xicrtyto, artoxarttX>xiww; and the noun rendered atonement [s xataTJKayrj. The verbs mean nothing more than a change from one state to another, but the situation in which they are introduced determines the change to be from enmity to friendship. The words rendered propitiation are derived from I'tajxw; a verb known in the Greek classics to denote prop it iu7n reddo, the action of the person, who in some appointed method, tnrned away the wrath of a deity ; and a verb used by the authors of the Septuagint to express the action of the priest, who by presenting the sin-offering made atonement for the offerer. As these actions are precisely similar, both are expressed by the verb in the middle voice. Homer says, of,) r^uiv "Exat^yov Ixau-ytM., tf^a ,)i^ai '■>* and it is Said of the priest in the Septuagint, flaa^fat, or ^laamro, rff^i aixa^tias.-f But when the interces- sion of Moses had upon one occasion turned away the wrath of God, this is expressed by the verb in the passive, aa^drj Kv^i,oi.X As the use of the verb l-Ka-txio in the Septuagint is thus exactly agreeable to the classical sense of it, it seems natural to understand, in the same sense, the words derived from that verb which are applied in the New Tes- tament to express the effects of the death of Christ. The words are, ixarraoj, which having been applied in the law to the sin-offering is applied 1 John ii. 2. and iv. 10. to our Saviour; and aaitr^^iov, Rom. iii. 25, which may be rendered, as in our English Bible, propitiation, by supplying ^H"a, but which from the analogy o( x^i.tr^^i-oi', i5ov\svfr;^t,ov, ^vaiaftrj^cov, supplying lir,fia, sliould rather be translated propitiatory or mercy-seat ; a sense of the word which has been eagerly laid hold of by some of the Socinians, but which appears to be not less adverse to their system than the word propitiation, because the mercy-seat never was approached without blood. There is only one place in the New Testament, Heb. ii. 17, in which the verb ixa^xw is applied to our Saviour. Although the construction be not exactly the same as 'in the Septuagint, where the noun is governed by ^f^t, it is plain that 'the sense of the verb is totally changed if it be translated, as the Socinians propose, taking away sin, i. e. destroying its power in the sinner ; for here is a third person intervening between God and the sins of the people, whose action in turning away wrath is ex])ressed, as in Homer and in the Septuagint, by the middle voice of txazxti. * Horn. II. i. 147. f Levit. v. t Exod. xxxii. 11. 472 DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. It appears then, that the amount of all the expressions, compre- hended under the first class, is precisely that which the apostles have sometimes stated, when, speaking of the death of Christ, they say, " we are saved from wrath by him :" and no person who reads the Scriptures can be at a loss to know what that wrath is. For although, in the refinement of some modern systems, it is counted a degradation of the Supreme Being to ascribe to him what has been called punitive justice, there are no views of the divine government more frequent or more clear in Scripture, than those upon which this attribute is rested. When we open the Old Testament, we find justice and judgment accompanying mercy in the descriptions of the Almighty, and many of the passages which have been quoted, in proof of the placability of the divine nature, contain this clause ; " who will by no means clear the guilty."* The history of the Old Testament abounds with examples, in which the hatred of sin often ascribed to the Almighty was made manifest by awful punishments of the wicked ; and one of these examples is thus interpreted by Jude ; Sodom and Gomorrah Tt^oxuvtat, Ssiyjiia, rtrgo$ auoviov Sixr^v vTtsxovaat,-]' JollU the Baptist iutroduceS the new dispensation, by declaring that if any one believed not on the Son of God, «7 o^ytj ®£ov ixsva ««' avtov-X The character of the new dispensation is thus drawn by Paul, Rom. i. IS, artoxaj^vrttitai 70^ o^yr; ©£ox) art' ov^avov irii, rtaoav a:si6i\.av xm a^Lxiav arSgwrtwj'' not a transient emotion, but a fixed purpose to punish transgression. This expression of the law, f^oi fxStxjjcftj, fycd avrartoficocru, is quoted as the principle of that punishment of which he shall be thought worthy who despises the gospel. § Retributive justice is thus accurately described, 2 Thess, i. 6, Etrtfg bixMov rta^tt ©f9 owtartoSovrnt toi^ ^-KiSov^vv vjxai ^Xl'^w and although immediate and temporal calamities are not the standing method of executing retributive justice, as they were in part under the former dispensation, yet the future judgment which the gospel reveals, and unto which the wicked are said to be reserved, is called -^h-i^o. o^yr^i, and is described both by our Lord and his apostles, in terms which imply the most complete display of what those who hold the Catholic opinion mean iDy the punitive justice of the Supreme Lawgiver, Such are the descriptions of the Almighty which pervade the Scriptures, and they clearly explain to us that eftect of the death of Christ which is marked by the first class of expressions. The gospel, proceeding upon the truth of these descriptions, assumes, as its prin- ciple, that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins ; and declaring that the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sins, it deduces from thence the necessity of a better sacrifice. It asserts, Heb. ii. 10, that it became him by whom and through whom are all things, to make the Captain of salvation perfect through sufferings ; iTiiiniv avtc^, i. e. that there was a fitness in them resulting from the character of the Supreme Ruler ; and by representing them as vicarious punishment, with which reconciliation and atonement are con- nected, it teaches clearly that the wrath of God is turned away from the sinner, by the punishment which he deserved being laid upon another. The Socinians endeavour to evade the argument drawn from the * Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7. f Jude 7. * John iii. 36. § Heb. x. 28—30. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 473 first class of expressions, by maintaining that reconciliation means notiiing more than tlie taking away the enmity wliich we entertained against God ; that it is nowliere said in Scriptnre that God is recon- ciled to us by Christ's death, but that we are everywhere said to be reconciled to God ; that the sufferings of Christ can produce no change in God, and that the change must be brought about in man : that there can be no need of reconciling God to man, when he had already shown his love to man so far as to send his Son to reconcile man to God. But in addition to what has been said of the punitive justice of God, I would farther observe, that as the term which we translate reconciliation implies a previous enmity or variance which was mutual, so the Scriptures explicitly declare, by all those views of the Almighty which I have been collecting, that there was an enmity on God's part ; and the exhortation to lay aside the enmity on our part proceeds upon this foundation, that the enmity on God's part is taken away by the death of his Son, AtaT^attsneai, and words connected with it are five times applied in the New Testament with respect to God : Rom. V. 10, 11 ; xi. 15; Ephes. ii. 16; Col. i. 20, 21. In this last passage particularly there is implied a previous enmity or variance which was mutual. The words are twice used with respect to man ; Matt. V. 24 ; 1 Cor. vii. 11. In both these passages the meaning is, see that he be reconciled to thee ; for in both the person addressed has done the injury. The verb 5i«x7.ar-r£c0at occurs in the same sense in the Septuagint version of 1 Sara. xxix. 4. If you read 2 Cor. v. IS — 21, the passage upon which the Socinians ground their argument, you will be satisfied that their method of interpreting reconciliation leaves out half its meaning. Here is a previous act of God, who hath reconciled all things to himself by Jesus Christ, who does not count to men their trespasses, and who committed to the apostles of Jesus the word or the ministry of reconciliation ; and subsequent to this act of God there is the execution of that ministry, by their beseeching men to be reconciled to God. The ministry is distinct from the act of God, because God does not immediately receive all sinners into favour by his Son, but requires something of those to whom the word of recon- cihation is published, in order to their being saved by it. But the ministry could not have existed had not the act of God, reconciling all things to himself, previously taken place ; and accordingly the very argument by which the apostle urges the exhortation committed to him is this ; " for he hath made him to be sin for us," i, e. God hath provided a method by which we may be assured that his anger is turned away from us; it only therefore remains that ye return to him. 2. The second class comprehends those expressions in which we read of redemption; as 1 Peter i. 18 ; Eph. i. 7. " Ye Avere redeemed with the precious blood of Christ ; we have redemption through liis blood." As our English word redeem literally means, I buy back, so xi/fgow ortoXDT'^Mffts, the Greek words used in the New Testament, are properly applied to the action of setting a captive free by paying y.vt^ov, a ransom ; and thus the sufferings of Christ are presented under the particular view of a price, by the payment of which we are set free. , Those who deny the truth of the Catholic opinion attempt to with- draw the support which it appears to receive from this class of ex- pressions by the following reasoning. It is impossible, they say, to 42* 3 R 474 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. apply these expressions in their literal acceptation to the efiect of the sufferings of Christ. For as a ransom is always paid to the person by whom the captive is detained, and as we were the servants of Satan, these expressions, literally understood, would imply that the death of Christ was a price paid to Satan. Since we must depart from the literal sense, it seems most natural to understand redemption as equivalent to deliverance ; for we read in the Old Testament of God's redeeming his people from trouble, from death, from danger, when no price is supposed to have been given ; and Moses, who was the instrument employed by God to deliver his people from the bondage of Egypt, is called. Acts vii. 35, rvt^u^trn. But if redemption means nothing more than a deliverance from sin, as effectually as if a ransom had been paid, the second class of expressions gives no real support to the Catholic opinion ; and is not inconsistent either with the Socinian opinion, which ascribes the deliverance to the influence of the doctrine and precepts of the Gospel, or with the Middle opinion, which ascribes it to the power acquired by the Redeemer. This reasoning proceeds upon a principle which is readily admitted, that both the English and the Greek words are often extended beyond their original signification. Although they denoted primarily deliver- ance from captivity by paying a ransom, they are applied to deliver- ance from any evil, and they are used to express deliverance by any means. Almost all other words, which originally denoted a particular manner of doing a thing, are susceptible of a similar extension of meaning, and it is the business of sound criticism to determine, by considering the circumstances of the case, how far the primary sig- nification is to be retained, or with what qualifications it is to be understood in every particular application. Now when we judge in this manner of the second class of expressions, the following remarks naturally present themselves. L It is not necessary to depart from their literal meaning, when they are applied to the effect of the death of Christ. For according to the true statement of the Catholic opinion, we are considered as under the sentence of condemnation which our sins deserved, as prisoners waiting the execution of the sentence, and as released by the death of Christ from this condition. Deliverance from the dominion of sin and the power of Satan is a secondary effect, a consequence of the application of the remedy ; redemption of our bodies from the grave is another effect still more remote. Both are mentioned in Scripture ; but the immediate effect of the death of Christ is, our deliverance from punishment, what the apostle calls the curse of the law ; and this punishment being in the power of the lawgiver by whom it was to be inflicted, the ransom, in consideration of which it is remitted and the condemned are set free, may be said to be given to him. 2. Although a captive may be released without any ransom, and although ^v"? or verbs derived from 'Kvt^ov, may be employed most naturally to express such a gratuitous release, yet this extension of the primary meaning of these words is excluded from the case to which they are applied in the New Testament, because a "kvh^ov is there expressly mentioned. When a Greek author, in relating the release of a prisoner, speaks repeatedly of anowa, or %vt^a,, as Homer does in the first book of the Iliad, it cannot be supposed that the re- DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 475 demption was without price. Every one feels this effect of intro- ducing the noun ^vt^ov, wlien the captive was detained by force under the power of an enemy ; and the significancy of the noim is not in the least diminished, when the prisoner is redeemed from a captivity which the Scriptures represent as judicial. The xtT^oj/ indeed, in that case, is not a price from which the lawgiver is to derive any advan- tage ; it is the satisfaction to justice upon which he consents to remit the sentence ; but still the mention of a >.vr^ov is absolutely inconsistent with a gratuitous remission. 3. The Septuagint has used the word 7.vr^ov in two places, to denote the consideration upon which a judicial sentence was remitted. There was the ^vr^a ■^vxrji, Exod. xxx. 12-16, called in our translation the atonement-money ; half a shekel given for tlie service of the sanctuary, by every one who was numbered, upon all occasions when the number of the people was taken, that there might be no plague among them. There was also ^vt^a rt^iitotoxMv. The first-born of every animal was sacred to the Lord. But God declared. Numb. iii. 12,46-51, that he took the whole tribe of Levi, instead of the first-born of all the tribes, on which account they are called ^vt^a rfgwrof oxwi' ; and as the whole number of the tribe of Levi fell short of the first-born males of all the other tribes by some hun- dreds, the Lord required for every one of this odd number the sum of five shekels, which is called in our translation, the redemption-money, in the Greek, xvt^a f wv nT^eom^ovTutv. Here, then, is ^vr^oy, which is known to denote in classical writers, a ransom paid in order to pro- cure the release of a captive, applied in the Septuagint, by a most natural extension of meaning, to the consideration given for deliver- ance from death ; an evil which the person so delivered could, in no other Avay, have escaped, any more than the captive could have re- covered his liberty without the ransom ; and the same idea is followed out in the New Testament. For as Paul says, 1 Cor. vi. 20, r^yo^aoOr^ts tiurjr, and as Peter, i. 18, in describing the price, has a manifest refer- ence to the atonement-money and redemption-money of the law, so tlie price by which we are bought and redeemed is called, Matt. xx. 28, UTgofcwnrtoxxw; and 1 Tim. ii. 6, a^tavr^ov iftf^ navtuiv. Whether, then, we interpret the New Testament according to the classical Greek, or according to that Avhich has been called the Hellenistical Greek, /. e. the Greek spoken by those Hebrews who, living mostly in the Grecian cities, used that universal language, but corrupted it by many Hebrew idioms ; we cannot avoid considering the second class of expressions as suggesting that something was given for our deliverance. And thus, the second class of expressions, by which the Scriptures mark the effects of the death of Christ, exactly coincides as to its amount with the first. The first class represents the wrath which the sins of mankind deserved, as turned away by the sufferings which another endured ; the second class represents prisoners under sentence of death for sin as set free, upon account of the sufferings by which another paid a ransom for their souls. 3. The third class compreiiends all those passages, in which for- giveness of sins is connected with the death of Christ. The words commonly used in the Greek Testament for this purpose are a^u:;Ut and a^saci. The verb, which signifies viitto a me, maybe applied in many different situations ; the meaning is always understood to be qualified 476 DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. by the circumstances of the case, and may easily be accommodated to that which we mean by forgiveness. For, as every sin involves an obUgation to punishment, when the Lawgiver sends away from him the sin, lie cancels the obligation and declares his resolution not to inflict the punishment which the transgression of his law deserved. Tlie Socinians argue from the frequent use of this expression in the New Testament, that forgiveness of sin is an act of the same kind with the remission of a debt. A(j)tri^i is applied, in classical writers, to both acts ; for we read a^ftj^fit astov z^eovi, and o^t^^t as tov tyx%rjixa-tos :* and our Lord seems to teach us that there is no difference between the acts by giving sins the name of debts, and applying to them under this name the verb a^i-}]^^. Thus, one of the petitions of the Lord's Prayer is, a^£s ^/ity ta o^ii'Krjixa.ta ^ni^v ; and in the parable, Matt, xviii. the - Almighty is represented as a master who says to the servant that owed him ten thousand talents, Ttarsawrju orpsat^v sxsivrjv a^tjxa aoi. This manner of expression certainly proceeds upon an obvious resemblance between the two subjects: the creditor has a perfect right to demand payment of his debt ; the lawgiver has a perfect right to inflict punish- ment upon the transgression of the law; and therefore, when the one remits the debt, and the other forgives the transgression, they do what no person is entitled to require of them. But the New Testament, in order to guard us against inferring from this resemblance, that the act of the Supreme Lawgiver in forgiving sin is of the same kind with the act of a creditor who remits a debt without asking payment, con- nects the forgiveness of sins with the blood of Christ, which is else- where declared to have been shed as a punishment of sin. For it is not only said that remission of sins is one of the blessings of the new covenant preached in the name of Jesus, expressions which might be reconciled with the Socinian system that the Gospel is merely a de- claration of forgiveness : but it is said. Acts xiii. 38, Siatovtov, through the means of this ma.n,v[ji.iv a^eaiia^ia^tLuv xatayyiTj^ttai. And the means employed by this man are explained in such passages as the follow- ing : 1 John i. 7, " The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin ;" Rev. i. 5, " To him that washed us from our sins in his own blood." And still more expressly. Matt. xxvi. 28, and Ephes. i. 7; in which last passage the remission of sin is introduced as the expli- cation of that redemption or release from the sentence of the law, which was purchased by the blood of Christ, and both are ascribed to the riches of tlie grace of God. It is plain therefore, that to the writers of the New Testament there did not appear any inconsistency between the forgiveness of sins and the laying the punishment of them upon another; and by declaring the intimate connexion between these two, they give their sanction to that leading principle in the statement of the Catholic opinion, which distinguishes the act of a lawgiver who in forgiving sins has respect to the authority of the law, from the act of a creditor who in remitting a debt disposes of his property at his pleasure. 4. The last expression by which the Scriptures mark the death of Christ is that in which we are said to be justified by his blood, and through faith in his blood. — * Scapulse Lexicon, in verb, a^ijj;ut. I DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 477 I mean not to speak at present of many questions respecting that act of God called justification, which will find their proper place under the application of the Gospel remedy. But as the change upon our condition, which is implied in the word justification, and which is ascribed to the efficacy of the blood of Christ, corresponds most exactly with the principles upon which the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion rests, I cannot better conclude the defence of that opinion, than by illustrating this particular view of the subject. And for that purpose I shall take, as the ground of my observations, that part of the apostle Paul's writings, in which he discourses fully of justifica- tion through the death of Christ, I mean Rom. iii. 19 — 31. The word Stxaiow is used both in the Septuagint and in the Greek Testament, in a sense to which nothing perfectly analogous occurs in classical writers. The sense is called forensic, /. e. it expresses tlie act of a Lawgiver or judge pronouncing a person righteous in the eye of the law, so as to be actjuitted from all obligation to punishment. Rom. viii. 33, Ttj tyxa?iffffi. xar'a ixXtxti^v 0fou ; ©soj o Stxatowv. ■ftj 6 xa-rax^trujv ; the word is used in the same sense by the Psalmist, Ps. cxliii. 2. Kac ^ri ciac'K9t]i «tj x^toif ^tara tov Bov'Kov (Ton, ott, ov SixaiuOtjattai iviortiov ffov rtaj ^wv. The apostle, who had just been quoting the ancient Scriptures of the Jews, seems to have had this passage of the Psalms in his view, when he says, Rom. iii. 20, 510*1 t| f^yw>' cojuou ov ^ixMOjOt^actai. Ttaaa ca^% fwrtfoc avr'ov. 6ta ya^ i/o^uoD Erttyi'cooij d,ua^f laj. This is the COnclusioU from the preceding part of his discourse, in which he has proved that all, both Jews and Gentiles, are under sin, and the whole world inohixoi tcp ®iu. It is plain thereibre, that the justification or acquittal of men in the sight of God cannot arise out of the works of the law ; for if, as the apostle has shown, a law was given by revelation to the Jews, and was written upon the hearts of the Gentiles, it would appear when they came before their Judge, that all of them knew what sin was, and therefore that all of them deserved to be condemned for being sinners. But how can those who deserve to be condemned as sinners be justified by a righteous God ? The apostle had asserted, Rom. i. 17, that a method of doing this was revealed in the gospel : which method is the explication of that saying found in the law, " The just by faith shall live." But before he comes to illustrate and confirm his assertion, he throws in a long discourse, the purport of which is to show that there is not upon earth a person Sixowj t| t^yuv, and there- fore that if there is such a thing as justification, it cannot be Siavofiov. Having established this point, which is the foundation of the gospel, he repeats his assertion in the 21st verse, with an addition, which he is now entitled to make ; ;kK'5 »'o,"ov' i- e. abstractedly from law, inde- pendently of the precepts contained in the Mosaic system, or written on the hearts of men ; and yet not in opposition to the law, for this method of justifying men was witnessed, i. e. foretold and foreshown by the law and the prophets. The method of justifying men, which is independent of law, and yet was witnessed by the law, is called most significantly, bi.xaioawr;@tov. The meaning of this name is in part explained by its being opposed, Rom. x. 3, to iSta Stxaiofrirj?. The apostle has shown that i5ia StxawouMj, or, ^watoatr*? 5ia vo^uov. Gal. ii. 21, does not exist ; and therefore, the method of justifying men may most properly be called S(.x(uoowi^ ©£od, because it must be such as God is 478 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. pleased to appoint. But this name implies further that it is a method becoming that God who is just ; a part of the significancy of the name which the apostle places fully in our view, when he comes to explain the method. But before he gives the exphcation, he dis- tinguishes the method which he is going to explain from justification flf^ywr or Si'i vofiov, by this addition, Sua TtujT'fwj it^aov x.^i6tov; and lie says it extends to all who believe, whether Jews or Gentiles, because in this respect there was no distinction between them, that all stood in need of the revelation of such a method, since by having sinned they had come short of that approbation which proceeds from God, and their actions, however agreeable to the maxims and customs of the world, could not, when tried in his righteous judgment, entitle them to a sentence of acquittal. The necessity of a method of justifying men, not formerly revealed being now fully proved, and the method being discriminated from every other by the names applied to it, the apostle proceeds to illus- trate the propriety of these names, by explaining what it is. His ex- plication is found in the 24th, 2 5th, and 26th verses. The apostle has introduced into this short description the great principles upon which the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion rests, and the chief of those Scripture expressions by which the truth of it is proved. He begins with ascribing this method of justifying men to the free grace of God. As far as they are concerned, justification is granted to them Sio^fttJ', as a free gift ; because their works did not entitle them to acquittal, and had it not been for the good-will of the Lawgiver, they must have been condemned. But this free gift is dispensed in a par- ticular manner. The Lawgiver does not simply justify, but he justi- fies through the redemption that is in or by Jesus Christ. Artoxvfgucrtj suggests that the v:io8ixov were delivered from the execution of the sentence of the law by the payment of a ransom ; and necessarily implies the good will of the ransomer. This interpretation of the word is confirmed by our being told immediately after, that the vTtoSixoi, were delivered, not merely by the power, but by the blood of the ransomer ; for the apostle adds, " whom God set forth, or exhibited to the AVOrld, iTMa-tr^^iov 6ta trj; rttijrfwj tv Tfa avtov alfxari.''' W^hcthcr I'Kantrj^uov be translated a propitiation or a propitiatory, the amount is the same. Either way his blood is the mean of turning away wrath ; and we found formerly that there is not only consistency, but the most inti- mate connexion between his blood propitiating the lawgiver, and. being the ransom by which the vTtoSuxoi are set free. The purpose for which God chose this particular manner of dis- playing his grace in justifying sinners is next mentioned. Eic tvSei^iv ttji SoxMocivvrji avtov', rtgoj tvSii^Lv -trj^ Sixtuonvvrji orrou. This repetition is a proof that the two intervening clauses are to be considered as a parenthesis, thrown in to illustrate the propriety of this method of declaring the righteousness of God. The intervening clauses are thus rendered in our translation ; " for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God :" but they might be more literally rendered, " upon account of the passing by of former sins in the for- bearance of God." n^oysyovotiov marks the sins committed before setting forth the propitiation, i. e. before the time of the Gospel. The Tto^eav; of these sins is rendered in our translation, the remission of DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 479 them ; yet it is remarkable that the apostle does not here use a^cjii, the word used for remission, both by our Lord and by the apostle himself, at all other times, and formed from a^i-rjui, the verb used in the Septuagint for forgiving sin. It is probable that the apostle had a reason for this singularity ; and many attempts have been made to find a reason in the ditferent signification of the two words. The truth is, that the joining a^taij and rto^focj to a.ixa^tr;fxafuv is an applica- tion of both words, almost peculiar to the sacred writers ; and that neither the etymology of fta^i^rjui, nor the practice of classical authors entitles us to say that it marks a less complete degree of forgiveness than a^irnxa. Tliis passage, therefore, gives no countenance to a sys- tem which has been formed with regard to the extent of the Gospel- remedy, that those who lived under the Mosaic dispensation, did not obtain entire deliverance from the punishment of sin till Christ came ; and there is no other passage which warrants us to consider the for- giveness of sins committed before that period, as different in kind, with respect to its efiects upon the sinner, from the forgiveness of sins committed after it. But when it is recollected that the sacrifices offered by the Jews did not purify the conscience, and that the heathen who had no direction from heaven often violated the laws of morality in the manner of offering their sacrifices, it is manifest that the for- giveness which Avas dispensed before the Gospel could not be in con- sideration of any satisfaction which was then made to the divine justice ; and, therefore, that this time may be called aj'03;»7 ©for, a time of forbearance, or as the word is often rendered in classical writers, induciae, a truce, during which the punishments due to the sins of men were suspended in so far, that the human race was allowed to exist, and to enjoy the bounties of Providence, although the whole world was guilty before God ; and many, whose names are mentioned in Scripture with honour, obtained forgiveness, although we cannot avoid considering them also as concluded under sin, because there is not a just man upon earth that liveth and sinneth not. The forgiveness granted during this truce may most fitly be called Tta^fctt;; because, however complete in respect of the persons to whom it was granted, it "sent by their side," transmitted to another time, the punishment which their sins deserved. This interpretation of the word corresponds exactly with an expression of the same apostle in his discoifrse at Athens ; Acts xvii. 30. Tovj yav ow x^ovovi tr;i aymaj i>rtf^t.6cov o ©foj, tavvv rCa^ay/i'KT^ei, T'oiy av^^iortocj rtait, rtavTa^^ou (ittavotiv. And these two expressions, when thus considered as explaining one another, place in a striking light the significancy of the two clauses which I called a parenthesis. A truce, during which, there was a suspension of the punishment due to sin, and the supreme Lawgiver overlooked transgressions, rendered the more necessary a demonstra- tion of his justice ; and therefore, in the time that now is, when the purposes for which the truce was continued so long are accomplished, and to rfKr^i^pLo. fov xiovov, the fulness of time foretold by ancient prophets is arrived, he hath set forth his Son as a propitiation, who, in shedding his blood, endured the wrath due to sins which had been committed, to the end that God, when he now justifies graciously those who could not be justified by their own works, might appear to be righteous. Now we see that the sins which God appeared to pass 480 DOCTKINE OF THE ATONEMENT. by in former times, when he granted forgiveness, were not forgiven without the shedding of that blood which was of infinitely greater value than the blood of bulls and goats, being the propitiation ordained and accepted of God, and in the fulness of time set forth, through faith in which all that believe are justified. The apostle, after stating that boasting is effectually excluded by the method of justification which does not arise out of works, and that every charge of partiality in the Supreme Being is removed by the riches of that grace which extends without distinction to all that believe, subjoins, voiiov ow xata^yov/Aiv Sia trj; rticfffw? ; f*9; yfi'orT'o' aT^'Ka voiuof latiofiiv. The objection is a natural one. If the method of justifying men, which God has now set forth, is x'^^'-i vofiov, apart from law, we seem to render the law idle, useless ; and we encourage men to trans- gress it. Far from it, answers the apostle. By the punishment, in this propitiation, of past sins that had seemed to be overlooked, and by justification through faith in the blood of Christ, we establish the law ; for God thus demonstrates to the world that transgressors have no hope of escaping with impunity ; whereas, if no such propitiation had been set forth, the impunity of the old world, and the justification of those who could not be justified by their own works, might have encouraged men to continue in sin. Other interpretations of this passage have been given. But if it appears that by understanding every word in its natural and usual acceptation, we bring out a sense of the whole passage consistent with the context, and agreeable to other parts of the Apostle's writings, there is the strongest internal evidence that we have interpreted the apostle rightly ; and, in that case, there is here an apostle of Jesus giving, in a full and formal discourse, the most explicit confirmation of the Catholic opinion. He presents to us the Supreme Being under the character of a lawgiver, and he states the death of Christ as an event intended to establish the law by exhibit- ing the punitive justice of the lawgiver. At the same time, far from considering this method of vindicating the divine authority as incon- sistent with the love of God to man, he ascribes the justification which is thus dispensed, to the free grace of God. He does not, as the Socinians do, place the love of God in this, that he forgave sins without reference to any other being, but he says, Rom. v. 8, that " God commendeth his love to us, in that, while we were sinners, Christ died for us ;" and he does not, like those who hold the middle opinion, rest our deliverance from the evils of sin merely upon the power acquired by our Redeemer, but, having presented, as we have seen, the death of Christ under the character of a punishment by which the justice of the lawgiver is demonstrated, he unfolds the same idea when he says, Rom. v. 9, 11, " Being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him ; and not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." Grotius de Satisfactione Christi. Slillingfleet on the Sufferingg of Christ. Clarke. DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. 481 Tomkins' Jesus Christ the Mediator. Elliot's Vicarious Sacrifice. Law's Theory of Religion. Warburton. Macknight's Comtn. on the Hebrews, and Essay on the Mediation of Christ. Magee on the Atonement. 43 o .5 482 ' ETERNAL LIFE CHAPTER IV. ETERNAL LIFE. In order to complete the view contained in the CathoUc opinion of the nature of the Gospel remedy, we have yet to consider in what manner it connects the hope of life eternal with the interposition of Jesus Christ, According to the Socinian opinion, Jesus Christ is simply the mes- senger who brought from God, together with the assurance of pardon, the promise of life eternal to all who repent ; and according to the middle opinion, he received from his Father, in recompense for his sulierings, the power of giving eternal life, so that all those who re- ceive this inestimable gift receive it upon his account as the partakers of his reward. There is another opinion upon this subject found amongst the many liypotheses with which the works of the ingenious and eccentric Bishop Warburton abound. It is mentioned occasion- ally in former parts of his works, and from him it descended to Bishop Hurd, and some of his other admirers amongst the English clergy ; but he reserved the full elucidation of it to the ninth book of the Divine Legation of Moses, which was published by Bishop Hurd after his death, as a supplement to his works. This ninth book, which professes to be an attempt to explain the nature and genius of the Christian religion, and "' to furnish the key or clue which is to open to us, and to lead us through all the recesses and intricacies of the last dispensation of God," unfolds with much pomp, but with a very slender degree of evidence, the following system, the amount of which may be given in a few words. Warburton considers pardon on repentance as a doctrine of natural religion, which is published indeed in the Gospel, but which did not in any measure depend upon the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, because the law of nature teaches us that repentance is the means of recovering the favour of God, when it has been forfeited by a breach of that law. So far he coincides with the Socinians. But he differs from them in asserting, and in proving most ably, that the death of Christ was truly a vicarious sacrifice ; and the peculiarity of his system lies in his finding room for the necessity of such a sacrifice, although he contends that from the principles of natural religion it may be collected that God will, on the sincere repentance of offenders, receive them again into favour. The place which he finds for it is this. Immortal life, he says, is a thing extraneous to our nature ; not necessarily inferred from the relation between the Creator and the creature ; and no part of the natural reward of good conduct. It was not conferred upon man when he was first created, but was the sanction of that particular covenant which God made with our first ETERNAL LIFE. 483 parents some time after their creation ; when he placed them in the garden of Eden. It is a free gift which was originally suspended upon the condition of obeying a positive command, which was for- feited by the transgression of that command, and which is restored in the Gospel. The whole character of the Gospel, according to War- burton, lies in this, that it is the restoration of the free gift of immor- tality ; and laith in the blood of the Son of God is the positive com- mand, upon which God the giver has been pleased to suspend his gift. Abstinence from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the condition of the original grant ; faith in the blood of the Son of God, as a vicarious sacrifice, is the condition upon which the resto- ration of the grant is suspended; both are positive commands, deriving all their value from the pleasure of him who appointed them, but for that very reason both are indispensable conditions of the gift. If there is any truth in the principles upon which we rested the doctrine of atonement, this account of the Gospel is a most incomplete theory ; and I have mentioned it only because the contrast may serve to illustrate that part of the Catholic opinion which I am now going to state. In Warburton's system, the gift of immortality which was purchased by the sufferings of Christ is detached from the pardon preached in his name, the former being peculiar to the Gospel, the latter being the common doctrine of natural religion ; and redemption and justification are appropriated, in this system, to the price paid and accepted for tiie particular gift of eternal life, without being supposed to have any reference to the means of restoring the sinner to the favour of God in general. The Catholic opinion on the other hand, takes the gift of eternal life which is the termination of the remedy, in connexion with all the steps that prepare and qualify us for the termination; and, by thus embracing the whole of the Gospel revela- tion, instead of forming a system upon a partial view, it both appears to give a natural interpretation of the separate branches, and also derives much support from the harmony with which they unite. There is not in this part of the Catholic opinion that opposition to other systems which we found in the former part. The Catholic opinion agrees with the Socinian as to the promise of eternal life, which God has given us in Christ ; with the middle as to the power of the Redeemer in conferring it ; with Warburton's system as to the free restoration of that which had been forfeited, and could not be claimed. Rut it differs from all the three in comprehending points which they omit, and in marking connexions which they overlook ; and therefore, I have not here to engage in tliat kind of controversial discussion whicli was necessary in stating the doctrine of atonement, but merely to give a delineation of what those who hold the Catholic opinion consider as a complete account of the nature of the Gospel remedy. The foundation of the hope of eternal life is laid in what the Scrip- tures call reconciliation. For if all men are under the sentence of condemnation, and so children of wrath, that sentence nuist be reversed in order to their being delivered from wrath, before they can look forward with the expectation of good to other states of being. This order is beautifully stated by the apostle Paul in several passages, such as the following. Rom. v. 1, 2, ''Therefore being justified by 484 ETERNAL LIFE. faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in the hope of the glory of God." The condemnation pronounced upon the first transgression included a sentence of death ; " dust thou art, and unto dust shall thou return ;" a sentence which although not immediately executed upon the transgressors, has ever since retained its power over their posterity ; for death, which entered into the world by sin, 6t>j^f, passeth upon all men. If this event, which withdraws men from their abode upon earth, and puts an end to the present exertion of their faculties, were in reality, what it appears to be, the termination of their existence, the evils introduced by sin could not be said to receive a remedy, because this part of the sentence of condemnation, although suspended for a little, would in the end be fully executed. The Gospel, therefore, professing to bring a remedy for these evils, and yet not professing to deliver men from returning to the dust, reveals a resurrection of the body from the dust, with which it is mingled after death, and thus opens to man the pos- sibility of receiving hereafter, in his whole nature, that complete remedy which is not administered here. This prolongation of exist- ence, beyond the period when it is forfeited by that sentence to which all the posterity of Adam are subject, may be stated as the first branch of the reversal of the sentence ; and in the New Testament it is uni- formly ascribed to the interposition of Jesus. Heb. ii. 14, "He took part of flesh and blood "» Sta -tov ^vatov xa.ta^yrirjrj tov to x^ato^ ixovta tov ^vatov, rovteatt tov 8ia^o\ov ; that through death he might render unavail- ing the power of him who has the power of death." 2 Tim. i. 10, xata^yr^'javtoi ficv tov ^vatov, ^^ti'^avto^ 8s ^lot^v xac ct4)5a^(5ta»' 6ta tov svayys%cov. 1 Cor. XV, 57, " Thanks be to God who halh given us the victory over death through our Lord Jesus Christ." It is not meant by these expressions that the world had no hope of immortality till Jesus came. From the beginning of the world, in all countries, and in every state of society, men have looked forward to another life. Although the promise of life eternal formed no part of the sanction of the law of Moses, yet the hope of such a life is often expressed in the Psalms, and by the prophets : it had become a part of the national faith of the Jews before Jesus came, and we find both our Lord and his Apostles adducing proofs of a future state out of their ancient Scriptures. Jesus, therefore, is said to have brought life and immortality to light, not that he was the first who taught it, — not merely because his manner of teaching it was free from the obscurity and hesitation which appeared in every former teacher who spoke of this subject, — but principally because that which he did took away the obstacles which no other had power to remove. Death intervenes by a judicial sentence between the present life and that future life for which man looks. No other teacher had authority to say that this judicial sentence would be reversed by a restoration of the life which it took away. But Jesus, having by his death procured an acquittal from the sentence, renders death ineflectual for the purpose of preventing the future life of man ; so that immortality when taught by him may be as readily embraced and as firmly believed as if death did not intervene. But, although an acquittal from the sentence of death is necessary ETERNAL LIFE. 485 in order to our future existence, the hope of what we call life eternal does not necessarily arise from this acquittal. For mere existence in a future state, even when supposed to be free from those pains which would render it a curse instead of a blessing, does not satisfy the desires of the human soul. In looking forward to other states of being, it pants for enjoying there the happiness of its nature ; and it is manifest that there is a wide dilference between a prolongation of life after it had been forfeited, and a right to the greatest blessing which the Father of spirits can bestow — the perpetual enjoyment in his presence of those benefits which he may resume when he will, and of a measure of them supposed to be infinitely superior to all that he is seen at present to bestow. It is agreed, therefore, by Christians of all denominations, that what we call eternal life is the gift of God ; an expression which they have learnt from the Apostle Paul, who uses it in a situation which shows that he meant to give it all its signifi- cancy. Rom. vi. 20. " The wages of sin is death ; but the gift of God, fo ;Kaa^ov. Phil, ii. 8. In like manner, the Scriptures, in order to show that the efficacy of the death of Christ was not confined to the deliverance from punishment, which is generally spoken of as the immediate effect of that event, represent it in different places as having procured for us also eternal life. Heb. ix. 12, 15, " By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. He is the mediator of the new testament, thnt, by means of death, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." 1 Thess. v. 9, 10, " Christ died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep," i. e. whether we be found alive or dead at the general resurrection, " we should live together with him." Thus, in the language of the New Testament, Acts xxvi. 18, a^jstj aua^tiuv and xxt]^oi IV toLg •yjyia.'jfifvoci; are Conjoined as flowing together from the interposition of Christ : and agreeably to this language, the active and passive obedience of Christ, words seldom used in modern times, are considered as constituting together what are called his merits, — what the Apostle, Rom. v. 18, calls tv Sixatuua, which he opposes to the ^v na^aTttuixa of Adam. He does not mean one single act of Jesus, but the merit or righteousness arising -out of all his actions and all his sufferings taken in one complex view, through which righteousness the free gift comes upon all men, «? StxatwcH- ^co»;? . For Jesus who was infinitely blessed and glorious in himself, and who, possessing all things from the beginning, Avas incapable of receiving a personal reward, undertook that economy which the Scrip- tures reveal for our sakes ; and all the merit arising out of the execu- tion of it is imputed or transferred to us, i. e. counted as ours, so that we derive the benefit of it. He was made " sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." 2 Cor. v. 21. The same thing is expressed, Gal. iv. 4, 5. Jesus was made under the law in two respects ; in respect of the sanction of the law, the curse due to transgressors which he endured, and in respect of the precepts both of the ceremonial and of the moral law which he fulfilled. In his sufferings and in his actions, he did the will of his Father ; and this obedience, being yielded in the human nature which he assumed in order to accomplish our deliverance, is considered as yielded in our stead and for our sakes ; the merit of it is counted to those to whom the remedy of the Gospel is applied, so that upon account of it we are both delivered from the curse of the law, and " receive the adoption of sons." This last expression, which is commonly used in the New Testament to mark the change produced upon the condition of Chris- tians by Christ's having made peace, manifestly includes that right to eternal life which they acquire through him. From enemies they become " children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God, ETERNAL LJFE. 487 and joint heirs with Christ." Heaven is the house of their Father, their city, tlioir countr}^, or, as our Lord has expressed it, " the king- dom prepared for them from the foundation of the world," which they are called to inherit. liut, if that account of the effect of Adam's transgression upon which the Catholic opinion proceeds be founded in Scripture, his posterity are not qualified to take possession of this inheritance. The corruption wliich they inherit from their ancestor, being an estrange- ment from the fountain of life, upon which account it is known by the name of spiritual death, is diametrically opposite to that intimate communion with God implied in life eternal ; and as this corruption is sufficient, independently of all outward evils, to make men wretched upon earth, so, if it were carried with them beyond the grave, they would find, even in that state where pure spirits enjoy supreme felicity, the misery inseparable from sin. That the remedy, therefore, may correspond to the extent of the disease, and that Jesus may truly accomplish the purpose for which it is said he was manifested by destroying the works of the devil, it is not enough that he abolished death, or rendered death ineffectual for preventing the future life of man, and purchased by his merits an everlasting reward ; his religion must also confer upon his followers those qualifications and disposi- tions by which they may be meet for entering into life. Whether this change upon the character of men is accomplished by the moral influence of doctrine, precept, and example, or by the efficacious in- fluence of the Spirit, and how this last, which the Scriptures seem to declare, can be reconciled with that liberty which enters into all our conceptions of an accountable agent, are questions which belong to that division of our subject which I called the application of the remedy. But that there is such a change, in whatever manner it be eflected, is unequivocally declared in such expressions as the following. All those whom Christ delivers Irom punishment, and to whom he gives a right to eternal life, are " made free from sin ;" they " become the servants of God ;" they "put off" the old man which is corrupt;" they " put on the new man which is renewed after the image of God;" they are " dead unto sin, and alive unto God through Jesus Christ ; a peculiar people, zealous of good works."* These expressions, and many others of the same kind, paint a character of mind, and a gene- ral tenor of life, which constitute the beauty, the health, and dignity of the human soul, and from which there result that " peace which passeth all understanding" here, and the capacity of enjoying supreme felicity hereafter. From what has been said the propriety is evident, with which the two words salvation and redemption are employed to denote eternal life purchased by Christ ; as Heb. v. 9, " being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation, atno? mtr]ita^ aiunov, unto all them that obey him." And Heb. ix. 12, " having obtained eternal redemption, aiwRttf /.vT'^ujtv si^aasvot; ." As the happiuess of heaven is obtained for us in the same manner with the acquittal from the sentence of con- demnation, and is the entire removal of the evils which sin had intro- duced, this completion of the undertaking of the Redeemer is most * Rom.vi. Ephes. iv. 21— 24. Titus ii. 13, 14. 488 ETERNAL LIFE. fitly designed by the words Avhich primarily denoted the acquittal : and the epithet atwwo? is significant of the very same thing which John has expressed in the description of the city of the living God, where the tree of life grows, the leaves of which are for the healino' of the nations ; Kev. xxn. 3, Kat riav xatavaSs^a. ovx istai, tti, i, e. the ci\rse pro- nounced upon man, when he was driven from the tree of life, is completely removed when he is re-admitted to it, and it shall return no more. Thus Jesus, by giving what is called Rev. xxii. 14, " a right to the tree of life," does indeed destroy the works of the devil : he is the second Adam, who restores all that the first had forfeited ; and the completeness of the remedy which he brought cannot be better ex- pressed than in the words of Paul, Rom. v. 21, "that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." We have now seen the manner in which the hope of eternal life, or a right to the tree of life, is connected with what Christ did upon earth. But a right so infinitely above their deserts, conferred by the free grace of God upon those who were under sentence of condemna- tion, transcends all our experience of the divine goodness, and all our conceptions of generosity : and therefore, " God, willing to show more abundantly unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel," hath confirmed this right by all the discoveries given in Scripture of the present condition of that person from whose merits it is derived. The resurrection of Jesus may be mentioned as the first branch of the confirmation of that right acquired for us by his death. Had Jesus, after dying for our sins, continued under the power of the grave, doubts must have arisen in every mind impressed with a sense of guilt, whether his blood was able to take away the sins of the world. But when all the sufferings which he endured as the punishment of sin were concluded by his being restored to life, here was a fact pre- sented to the senses of mankind, containing plain and incontestible evidence that the effects ascribed to his sufferings were attained ; be- cause the Supreme Lawgiver, in loosing him from the pains of death, declared that he accepted that atonement which his death offered. Accordingly it is said, Rom. iv. 25, that Christ " was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justifi- cation :" i. e. we know by his resurrection that we who had offended are, upon account of his sufferings, accounted righteous before God ; and it is said, 1 Pet. i. 3, that " God hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead ;" i. e. his resurrection is an experimental assurance of our victory over death. But the Scriptures reveal much more than the resurrection of Jesus, or his bare return to life : and the full security given in the Gospel for our attaining the exalted reward, which is included in the com- plete redemption procured by his death, is found in all the circum- stances that are revealed concerning the life which he now lives with God. For if, as the apostle reasons, Rom. v. 10, "when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son ; much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life ;" i. e. if his death ETERNAL LIFE. 489 had the effect of propitiating the divine wrath, much more shall his life insure eternal salvation to those who are now no longer enemies. Eternal life having been acquired for us by the death of Christ, and yet behig a distant reward, the Gospel affords us tliis most satisfying security tor its being at length conferred, that the person who died to acquire it is alive for evermore, and has the keys of hell and of death.* It is not necessary, in this place, to dwell upon the illustration of tlie various points which belong to this subject, I shall only bring them together in one view, to sliow distinctly how they unite hi con- stituting that security of which I now speak. Jesus Christ, who gave his flesh for the life of the world, is himself the giver of life. He is revealed as the Creator of the world, from whom the life of all the inhabitants of the earth orighially proceeded. He displayed upon earth the power of raising from the dead whom he would ; he directs us to consider these occasional exertions as a specimen of that power with Avhich he shall raise all men at the last day ; and he says that " power is given him over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as the Father hath given him."t There can be no doubt, therefore, that the Son of God, " who hath life in himself, is able to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him." That he is willing to exert his power in giving eternal life to those whom he redeemed, is an inference clearly deduced from his death. A Being, who did the will of the Father, in dying that we might live , through liim, who revived that he might be Lord of all, and wliose purposes do not admit of alteration, either from the mutability of his own mind, or from external opposition, cannot be conceived to leave unfinished the gracious purpose for which he suffered, but will in due time put us in possession of the right which he acquired for us at such a price. The force of this inference is illustrated by the various language in which the Scriptures express the intimate connexion between Christ and the persons for whom he died. They are those whom God hath given him ; the subjects of his kingdom ; the members of his body ; the flock which he gathers into his fold, and which he defends from every enemy ; his sheep who hear the voice of the good shepherd, and follow him. In the felicity which this peculiar people, whom he hath purchased for himself by his own blood, attain through him, he sees the travail of his soul ; and the praises which are represented in the book of the Revelation, as proceeding from the company which he hath redeemed to God, publish the glory of his name to tlie whole inteUigent creation. He was not ashamed to call them brethren, for he took part with them of flesh and blood ; and even now that he is set down on the right hand of God, he has not laid aside the nature which he assumed ; for he is still called the Son of Man. lie appears in the presence of God for us, a merciful and faithful high priest ; and, touched with the feeling of our infirmities, he niaketh intercession for us, and is our advocate with the Father. Not that he uses any words * Rev. i. 17, 18. + John xvii. 2. 3T 490 ETERNAL LIFE. to move God ; but that, in virtue of the blood which he shed on the cross, and with which he is said now to sprinlde the mercy-seat in heaven, he procured us access to the Father, and presents our prayers and services, which, when offered in his name, are " spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by him." Tlie high priest of the Jews entering upon the day of atonement into the holy of holies, with the blood of the bullock and the goat, and with the names of the children of Israel upon his breastplate, was a striking type of the intercession of Christ. But there are two essen- tial points in which the antitype excels the type. The one is, that the high priest of the Jews entered once a-year upon a stated day ; but the intercession of Jesus continueth forever, (Heb. vii. 24, 25,) so that at all times we may " come boldly to the throne of grace." The other is, that none but the high priest ever entered ; whereas Jesus, who entered into the true holy place, after having obtained eternal redemption, has, by his entering, opened and made manifest a way for us. He is our forerunner, Tt^oS^o^oi ini^ ruiM, Heb. vi. 20: our hope "entereth into that within the vail," whither he is gone; and although we yet remain in the outer court while he is making inter- cession, we know assuredly from his words, that where he is, there shall also his servants be.* This assurance is confirmed by the nature of the blessings which his intercession procures. When he ascended on high, he received gifts for men, which are continually imparted to those who derive from him a right to eternal life. The Holy Spirit, by whom these gifts are distributed, is called the Spirit of Jesus, and is said to be sent by him :f and he is not only the source of comfort, and the cherisher of hope, but he is expressly styled, Eph. i. 14, a;,/ja(?wv tjjs x%.Tn^ovoi.aai r,au>v, " the earnest of our inheri- tance." The significancy of this expression will appear by attending to the difference between an earnest and a pledge. A pledge is a security for some future payment, which is delivered up as soon as the payment is made ; and therefore it may be, and generally is, of a kind totally different from the payment. An earnest is a part of The payment given as an acknowledgement that the whole is due, the same in kind with that which is to follow. In this sense the Spirit is called the earnest of our inheritance, because the life formed upon earth by the influences of the Spirit is the temper of heaven already begun in the soul. It is much more than a preparation for heaven : it is an assurance which a Christian has within himself, given to him by the Lord of life, that he shall certainly reach heaven. For as the apostle speaks, Col. iii. 3, 4, that life which we lead is supported by the invisible influences of the Spirit, whom Christ, who sits on the right hand of God, sends in the hearts of his people. The springs of this life are withdrawn from the eyes of men ; but they are hidden with Christ ; and they will become manifest at that time, when he by whom we live shall appear, and we, who have risen with him to a new life, shall be partakers of his glory. While Christians are thus sealed by the Spirit unto the day of redemption, Jesus is in heaven preparing a place for them. He * John xiv. 3. f 1 Pet. i. 11. John xv. 26. ETERNAL LIFE. 491 directs by the power that is committed to him every event for the good of that churcli whicli he purchased for iiimself; and when all the purposes of divine Providence are accomplished, he shall be revealed from heaven as the judge of men. We are to appear before the tribunal of him who died, that we might live, and we are to receive from his hands the crown of life. The particulars which I have now brought together, unfold the full amount of that expression of Peter, " Thou Iiast the words of eternal life i'"^ and of that expression of John, " this is the record, that God hath given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son."t It was purchased for us by him ; the power of conferring it resides in him; he prepares us for it, and he will at length bestow it. From this view of the connection between the hope of eternal life, and the interposition of Christ, (here arises also the significancy of that name which is given to him, the mediator of the New Testa- ment, tlie mediator between God and man; ^(citrn. Pleb. ix. 15. 1 Tim. ii. 6. He is not merely Ii^ter-mincitis Dei, the messenger who, coming from God to man, declared the divine purpose ; but he is a person, who, standing in the middle bet\veen God and his ofiending creatures, otiers on our part a satisfaction to the divine justice, and brings us from God an assurance that the satisfaction is accepted. He becomes in this way, Heb. vii. 22,xg«rToro5 Sta^jjxj^jfyyiof, the surety of a better covenant, which being confirmed by the death of the surety, acquires the nature of a testament, an irrevocable deed, because the death loses its effect unless the blessings of the cove- nant are conferred upon those for whom the surety died. Yet by his reviving after he died, he becomes himself the dispenser of these blessings, and is in this most eminent sense a mediator, that having procured us access to the Father by his death, he ever lives to make intercession. His mediation is efl'ectual, because it proceeds upon the merit of what he did for our salces ; all the riches of divine 'grace are connected with this merit ; and the nature of the gospel remedy may be thus described according to the Catholic 0])inion : — it is pardon and eternal life, or a complete redemption from the evils of sin, obtained and conferred through the mediation of a person, who having offered himself a sacrifice for sin, and being now set doAvn at the right hand of God, is emphatically styled "the Captain of Salva- tion, the author and finisher of faith." To those who have a slight impression of the nature of that condi- tion which called for the remedy, there may appear to be a super- fluity of condescension in tliis mediation. But they who think of the fears and suspicions which are natural to guilt, which are often described in Scripture, and which are there confirmed by an awful exhibition of the punitive justice of the Lawgiver, will perceive the utility and fitness of all that provision which is made for overcoming the distrust and reviving the hopes of those who are justified by the blood of Christ. By the gracious condescending views which are given of the present condition of that person who died for sins, in * John vi. 68. f 1 John v. 11. "^^^ ETERNAL LIFE. order to procure for men the most glorious regard, the gospel becomes the religion of those to whom it is addressed, the humble, the contrite the poor m spirit: and by Jesus, we "believe in God, who raised his mighf beV God' -' "^'"^ ^^""^ ^^ ^^''^' '^"' ""^' ^^''^ ""^ ^^^P^^ * 1 Pet. i. 21. EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. 493 CHAPTER V. EXTENT OP THE REMEDY. Having treated of the nature of the remedy which the gospel brings, I proceed now to give an account of the different opinions which have been held concerning the extent of that remedy. But before I enter upon the controverted questions on this subject, I wish to direct your attention to two preliminary points. In the first all Christians agree ; and the differences respecting the second do not distinguish any great bodies of Christians, but are confined to a few individuals. Section I. The first preliminary point is, that the gospel appears framed and designed by God to be the religion of the whole human race. As the Almighty Father made of one blood all nations to dwell upon the face of the earth, we cannot suppose that the paternal affection, with which he looked down upon those whom he formed after his own image, will be in the smallest degree affected by the varieties of climate and situation; and all the conceptions of enlight- ened reason lead us to presume, that if their moral state render them the objects of his compassion, the exercise of that compassion will not be bounded by any lines so capricious as those which the confines of different states mark upon the globe. Accordingly, the declara- tion made by the Almighty immediately after the first transgression intimates by the form of the expression, an idea most becoming the sovereignty of Him who speaks, that all the children of Adam were somehow to partake of the fruits of that victory which the seed of the woman was to gain over the tempter, and the promise made to Abraham, that in his seed all the families of the earth were to be blessed, conveys the most explicit assurance, that, at some future time, a dispensation, commensurate in extent with the population of the earth, was to proceed from the descendants of Abraham. The dispensation given by Moses to the posterity of the patriarch was of a very different kind. It was confined, by the terms of its promul- gation, to the land of Judea : the various ceremonies which it pre- scribed were such as the inhabitants of countries remote from Jerusa- lem could not perform; and the object of all the institutions was to preserve, in a small district, a peculiar people, holy unto tlie Lord ; 44 494 EXTENT OP THE REMEDY. while the rest of the world were left in ignorance and idolatry. The partiality, from which this local dispensation appears at first sight to have flowed, is a favourite subject of declamation with deistical Avriters. It is stated as an unanswerable proof that the Jewish religion is unworthy of the Supreme Being. The boasted peculiarity of the children of Israel is ranked by these writers amongst the other forms of superstition, which national vanity and a concurrence of circumstances maintained for ages in particular districts ; and as Jesus and his apostles assert the divine authority of Moses, and build Christianity upon the law given by him, their claims of being the messengers of Heaven are represented as very much shaken by this degradation of Judaism. Tliis plausible objection is fully answered in all the able defences of Christianity; particularly by Leland, in his View of Deistical Writers, and by Clarke, both in his Evidences of Religion, and in some of his Sermons. The subject is also treated in Shaw's Philoso- phy of Judaism; in Law's Considerations on the Theory of Religion; in Jortin's Discourses on the Truth of the Christian Religion ; in Warburton's Divine Legation of Moses ; and in various treatises on the harmony of the divine dispensations. I shall endeavour to state, in a short compass, the idea which these writers have fully eluci- dated. The children of Israel were not distinguished by a special revela- tion upon account of any peculiar excellence of character, which rendered them, more than other nations, the objects of the divine favour ; but they were raised up, in the wisdom of Providence, as the nistruments of preserving in the world, amidst abounding idolatry, the knowledge and worship of the true God, and of conveying to future ages the hope of that Deliverer who had been promised from the beginning. To qualify them for this important ollice, they were separated from the surrounding heathen by circumcision, by a burdensome ritual, and by many express prohibitions against inter- marrying with their neighbours. But it was not meant that they should remain unknown. The geographical situation of the land, which God had given them, brought them within the view of those nations who make the most conspicuous figure in ancient history. The commerce which they were obliged to maintain with other nations, the fortunes of some individuals of that chosen race, and many circumstances in the history of the nation, particularly their captivities and their dispersions, drew the attention of the world to the singularities of their establishment. Some knowledge of their law was, by these means, carried abroad ; and from the land of Judea, as from a light shining in a dark place, there proceeded rays, which, in the midst of heathen superstition, prevented the darkness from being universal. It is difficult to estimate the degree of aid which the efforts of human reason derived from the revelation granted to the people of Israel. But the researches of Bryant, in his Ancient Mythology, and of other learned men, seem to place it beyond doubt, that this aid was more considerable than a superficial uninformed observer would apprehend. And when we consider the successive changes in the political state of the Jews, and the situation of the Roman empire at the time of the birth of that extraordinary personage, of whom EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. 495 there had been a general expectation, there appears to be the best reason for regarding the whole conduct of the Ahuighty towards his chosen people, as part of that preparation by which he opened to the world the universal and spiritual religion, which, in the fulness of time, was published by his Son, — a preparation, which in none of its parts was so rapid as to our imaginations may appear desirable, but which it would be presumptuous in us, upon that account, to pronounce unsuitable to the circumstances of the case. The law of Moses, then, was a local dispensation intervening between the promise made to Abraham, that in his seed all the fami- lies of the earth should be blessed, and the fulfilment of the promise. It originated in the promise ; it announced the great event, which was the accomplishment of the promise, and it terminated with that event. A great part of the study of a Christian divine lies in tracing the connexion between the preparatory dispensation, and that to which it pointed ; and the more intimately that he is acquainted with this connexion, the better able will he be to vindicate the God of the Jews from the charge of partiality. One thing is obvious, that this narrow confined religion gave notice of a dispensation that was to be universal. David says, in Psalm xxii. which is a continued prophecy of the Messiah, "All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the Lord ; all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before him ;" and the succession of Jewish prophets intimate, by various expres- sions, that the partial instruction, which the law of Moses afforded, was to be succeeded by a kind of teaching not confined to any one people, but under which nations that had been strangers to the true God were to know and worsliip him. It is true that the national vanity of the Jews, flattered by their peculiar privileges, gave other interpretations of such prophecies. They either conceived that the dispensation of the Messiah, by sub- jecting the nations of the earth to their dominion, was to exalt them to the empire of the world, then held by the Romans; or, if their minds did rise to some conception of a spiritual change upon the world, it went no further than this, that other nations were to ex- change the idolatry in which they had been educated for an observ- ance of the ceremonies given of old from Mount Sinai. They did not think that the chosen people of God could ever be made to descend to that equality with the heathen, which is implied in supposing that the offerings made in other countries are as acceptable to God as those presented at Jerusalem. Far less did it occur to their minds that the whole city was to be laid waste, and the temple of Solomon razed to the ground: and that this effectual abolition of the cere- monies of the law was to prepare the world for receiving a spiritual religion, clearly discriminated from that local system. These pre- judices of the Jews, founded upon a literal interpretation of their own sacred books, and possessing the minds of all ranks, required much attention at the first publication of the gospel. For Jesus appeared as the Messiah of the Jews, claiming to be that Son of David whom their prophets had described as a mighty prince ; and his religion, deriving a great part of its internal evidence from its perfect consis- tency with that former revelation of which it is the fulfilment, was to go forth from Judea to enlighten the ends of the earth. The order 496 EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. of Providence, then, required that Christianity should be preached first to the Jews ; and it was necessary that, if they did not embrace the promise made to their fathers, the manner of its being preached to them should be such as to render their infidelity inexcusable, and to vindicate the justice of the severe punishment ordained for their nation. Tliis is the key to a great part of the New Testament ; and I do not know any views which persons who expound the Scriptures to the people have more frequent occasion to bring forward and to apply, than those which I have now stated. From these views we derive the reason of our Lord's confining his personal ministry to the Jews, and forbidding the apostles, when he sent them forth during his abode upon earth, to go into the way of the Gentiles. From hence we are able to account for the slow opening of the universal character of Christianity ; and we learn to admire the skill and address with which our Lord employed general expressions, parables, and action, gradually to unfold this offensive truth. The name by which he commonly designed himself, " the Son of Man," was most expressive of his connexion with the whole human race. In his discourses with the Jews, he frequently called himself the light of the world, and many words dropped from him, which, howsoever they were under- stood by his hearers, appear to us intended to mark the full extent of his gracious undertaking.* " Other sheep I have which are not of this fold ; them also I must bring, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." " I, if I be lifted up," referring to the manner of his death on the cross, " will draw all men to me."t Several of his parables convey under a thin disguise the future extension of his king- dom, the rejection of those who thought they had an exclusive title to its privileges, and the introduction of those whom the Jews held in contempt.J Our Lord began his public ministry at Jerusalem by driving the buyers and sellers out of the temple ; and he repeated this action a little before his crucifixion. The action appears to an ordinary reader to be merely a transport of zeal. But if you read the enlightened commentary of Bishop Hurd at the end of the first volume of his sermons, you will regard it in a much higher light, as a symbolical action, intimating in the most significant manner that the house of God was to become, under the Christian dispensation, a house of prayer for all nations. The only place in the temple allotted for the devout heathen, or proselytes of the gate, who chose to come up to Jerusalem, that they might there worship the God of Israel, was an outer court, in which many things necessary for the service of the temple were exposed to sale. Our Lord, by driving the buyers and sellers out of this court, vindicated the rights of the Gentiles, who had been insulted during their devotions by the uproar of a fair; and although he did not proceed so far as to bring them into the sanctuary, yet by this mark of his attention he gave a pledge of the fulness of that grace which was soon to be revealed to them. Accordingly the commission given to the apostles immediately before his ascension, was unlimited. " Go, make disciples of all na- tions. Ye shall be witnesses to me unto the uttermost part of the * Mat. viii. 11. ] John x. 16 ; xii. 33. t Mat. xs. xxi. xxii. EXTENT OF THE REMEDT. 497 earth. And he said unto them, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."* The gift of tongues, conferred upon them ten days after his ascension, qualified them for executing this unlimited commis- sion : and the miracles, which they were enabled to perform, consti- tuted an evidence of their divine mission equally intelligible to men in all countries, and fitted to bring universal conviction. Paul, who was addod to the number of the apostles after the ascension of Jesus, was told by a special revelation at the time of his conversion, that he was to be sent far from Jerusalem to the Gentiles ;t and Acts x. relates the manner in which the minds of the other apostles, who still retained many of the prejudices of the Jews, were opened to conceive the true character of the gospel, and to understand the extent of their own commission. Peter was instructed in a vision not to call that unclean which God hath cleansed ; he then received a command to preach the gospel to Cornelius, a devout heathen ; and his preaching was accompanied with a descent of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost upon Cornelius and his family. These three circumstances, the vision, the command, and the gifts of the Holy Ghost, appeared to the other apostles to constitute a full vindication of his conduct ; and although they had blamed Peter when they first heard of his going in to the Gentiles, they were satisfied, after he expounded to them the whole matter, that by the gospel there is " granted to the Gentiles also repentance unto life." As soon as this enlarged idea took possession of their minds, it formed one great subject of their discourses and their writings ; and we see them labouring to bring it forth to the admiration of the world. While Paul avails himself of his Jewish learning to prove that the Gospel is the end of the law, his epistles abound with the declaration of that mystery, i. e. that part of the conduct of divine Providence formerly unknown, which had been revealed to him, that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and partakers of the same promise in Christ by the Gospel. He magnifies the grace of God, who now appears not the God of the Jews, but the God of the Gentiles also, " rich in mercy to all that call upon him ;" and he dwells upon this distinguish- ing excellence of the Gospel, that under it there is neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision, but that Christ is all in all. The Evangelist John, who wrote his Gospel long after the rest, in relating a saying of Caiaphas the high priest, adds these words of him- self, that Jesus Christ " should die not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God which were scattered abroad ;"t and in the book of the Revelation, where he writes by the commandment of Jesus the things shown to him in vision which were to be hereafter, he mentions an angel whom he saw flying in heaven, having the Gospel to preach to them that dwell upon the earth ; and he says that he beheld a great multitude of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.§ I have thought it of importance thus to bring together, in one view, • Mat. xxviii. 19. Acts i. 8. Luke xxiv. 46, 47. f Acts xxii. 21. t John xi. 40 — 52. § Rev. xiv. 6; vii. 9. 44* 3 U 498 EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. the Scripture account of Christianity as an universal reUgion, — as offering a remedy which, in this respect, corresponds to the disease, that it is not confined to any one nation, but may be embraced by men of every country. It is a branch of the evidence of Christianity, that there is nothing m its nature to prevent the universal publication of it, and that there is a tendency in the general course of things to bring about this event. And although the accomplishment of the l>rediction, that it is to be preached to all nations, has been delayed, there cannot fairly be drawn by reasoning or analogy any presump- tion that the prediction will never be accomplished. We are thus warranted to apply to the Christian religion that character which it assumes to itself as the religion of mankind ; we discern one sense in which it may with propriety be said that " God will have all men to be saved, and that Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world ;" and we perceive the significancy of that expression of Paul, " I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." Section II. The second preliminary point is, that the extent of the remedy brought in the Gospel is limited by the terms in which it is offered. As Jesus gave his apostles a commission to preach repentance and remission of sins in his name among all nations, they executed their commission in such words as these, " Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." " I testified," says Paul, " both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ."* From these passages, which accord with the general strain of the New Testament, it seems to follow, that the Gospel, which is the religion of sinners, and professes to bring a remedy for the evils of sin, is a remedy only to those who repent and believe. Although different sects of Christians, therefore, may disagree as to the description of repentance and faith, as to the manner in which they are produced, and the connexion between them and the efficacy of what Christ did ; it does not appear possible that any sect which receives the Scriptures can deny that a certain character or state of mind, which is there ex- pressed by repentance and faith, is required in all who partake of the remedy, and consequently that the extent of the remedy is limited by this requisition. This acknowledged point, that whosoever repents and believes shall be saved, is the great subject of preaching : and as it is the only point respecting the extent of the remedy, which is clearly and incontro- vertibly revealed in Scripture, so it is of infinitely greater importance than all the controverted points. They are matters of speculation, upon which it is natural for the human mind to form some opinion. * Actsiii. 19; xvi, 31; xx. 21. EXTENT OP THE REMEDY. 499 The opinion may be more or less agreeable to the most rational con- ceptions of the divine attributes, to the views incidentally given in Scripture, and to the great end of Christianity. There is truth or error, there is consistency or inconsistency in the sentiments enter- tained upon this as upon all other subjects; and as the Church of Scotland has adopted a particular system of opinions concerning the extent of the remedy, it is decent and fit that those who desire to be her ministers should be well acquainted with the grounds of that sys- tem. Bat it is not necessary that these grounds, or tliat the system itself should be explained to the people. We fulfil the office which is committed to the ministers of the Gospel, when we call our hearers to repent and believe, in order that they may be saved ; and all those teachers, who agree as to the character of the person by whom the remedy was brought, and as to the nature of the remedy, may dis- charge this duty with the same fidelity and the same energy, although they differ in their speculations as to many points that respect the ex- tent of the remedy. The Socinians, who differ from all other Christians as to the nature of the remedy, cannot be expected to agree with them as to the ex- tent of it. Considering the pardon of those who repent as flowing from tlie essential goodness of God, without reference to any thing that Christ has done, they must conceive that pardon is dispensed at all times, and in all places, with equal liberality ; and considering eternal life not as purchased by Jesus Christ, but as the free gift of God to creatures naturally mortal, they conceive that this gift will be bestowed upon all virtuous men that have lived from the beginning of the world under any dispensation of religion. They allow that Christianity was of great advantage to the world by bringing assurance of these truths ; and that those who lived in the ancient world were in the same situa- tion with the inhabitants of countries where the Gospel has never been published, without that comfort under a consciousness of infirmi- ties, and those incitements to well-doing, which Christians may derive from the Gospel. But if, on this account merely, they fail in their duty, their situation will plead indulgence for their failings; and if they attain nearly the same degree of virtue as Christians without the same advantages, they are still better entitled to partake of that exu- berant grace by which our Father in heaven rewards the services of his children. There is a system with regard to the nature of the remedy, which considers the loss of immortality as the only forfeiture incurred by the sin of Adam, and the restoration of forfeited life as the blessing ])ur- chascd by Christ. Those who hold this system are led by their prin- ciples to consider the purchase of the second Adam, as of the same extent with the forfeiture of the first: they allow, with the Socinians, that those who never heard of Christianity are destitute of many advantages for the improvement of their minds which that revelation affords : hut they do not conceive that the extent of the remedy is, in any measure, dependent upon the extent of the publication. They bring down the etfect of the death of Christ to a right which he has acquired of giving immortality to a race of beings by whom it had been forfeited, and they look upon an universal resurrection as the accomplishment of his undertaking. 500 EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. If both these systems are essentially defective as to the nature of the remedy, there must also be a defect in their manner of stating the extent of it. Christians who consider the death of Christ as an atonement, upon account of which the sins of those that repent are forgiven, have many points to take into view before they can deter- mine the manner in which this atonement reaches either those to whom it has been preached, or those to whom it has not. But although we are not prepared for stating that system with regard to the condition of persons who have not lieard of the Gospel, which results from the Catholic opinion concerning the nature of the remedy, it may be proper to mention, under this second preliminary point, a splendid speculation concerning the final state of the wicked, which has arisen out of some of the principles formerly delineated. If, according to the Socinian system, the essential goodness of God incline him at all times to pardon transgression, we cannot suppose that he will prolong the existence of creatures naturally mortal, only that he may continue, through all eternity, to punish the sins com- mitted during a few years upon earth : and if, according to the middle system, it is the character of the Gospel to restore forfeited life to the whole human race, it seems to follow, that the restored life cannot, in any case, be merely the capacity of enduring everlasting punishment, since, upon that supposition, the restoration of life, which is stated as a universal blessing, would to many be the greatest curse. These two systems, therefore, tend to produce the belief that those who have been wicked shall, after a certain time, be either annihilated or re- formed. The annihilation of soul and body, according to the Socinian system, is the natural mortality of man left to operate upon those who reject the offer of eternal life made in the Gospel ; according to the middle system, it is the curse which Adam conveyed to his posterity, which the Gospel offers to remove from all, and which it effectually removes from those who have lived virtuously. As the sins of those who reject this offer deserve a punishment more severe than any that is inflicted in this life, they are raised at the last day that they may receive according to their deeds ; but after they have endured a suffi- cient measure of punishment, they are left to relapse into that death, that extinction of being, in which the whole human race would have remained, had it not been for the grace of the Gospel. If the souls and bodies of all that have been wicked are at length annihilated, the final effect of the sins committed in this life will be a loss of existence in the universe, but not a perpetuity of misery ; for, after a certain time, no beings of the human race shall exist, but those who, in con- sequence of the virtues which they had displayed upon earth, are made happy for ever. Others conceive that the wicked shall not be annihilated, but, after a certain time, reformed. Considering the soul of man as naturally immortal, and thinking it unworthy of the ruler of the universe to adopt, as a method of conducting his government, the destruction of a number of beings whom he had made to live for ever, they endea- vour to reconcile the future misery of the wicked with their system concerning the nature of the Gospel remedy, by supposing that the punishments which are endured after death, being intended, like EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. 501 many of the calamities of this hfe, to correct the vices of those upon whom they are inflicted, shall terminate in their reformation. If it be admitted that goodness constitutes the whole moral character of the Deity, that, as with respect to his understanding he is light, so with respect to his will he is love, and nothing but love, it will follow, that what are commonly called his other attributes are only modifications of goodness, the necessary result of this primary attribute ; that justice, which is generally stated as opposite to goodness, is nothing else but a constant desire of giving to his reasonable creatures what their moral state requires. Those who are docile and tractable, he lead5 by gentle methods to the perfection of their nature ; those whose passions are impetuous, and whose hearts are hard, he subdues by afllictions, that they may become partakers of his holiness. The dis- cipline of this life, which often appears harsh, is only the expression of his fatherly love administering salutary chastisement ; and as this discipline does not produce its effect with regard to all during the sbort time that is allotted to them upon earth, he continues the chastise- ment in a future state, where it is administered with a severity suited to the depravity of the sufterer, and is prolonged till sin be completely destroyed. If all the wicked are at length thus reformed after death, the final effect of his transgressions that have been committed upon earth, is neither the destruction nor the everlasting misery of any human being : for the misery endured after death, which is described in Scripture by many lively images, gradually works the correction of that moral evil from which it sprung ; and when it has accom- phshed this end, every sinner will be rescued from the consequences of his transgression, and all the children of Adam placed in a state of unalterable virtue and happiness. A view of the termination of future punishment, which appears to be agreeable to the most enlarged conceptions of the divine goodness that reason can form, is supposed to derive much confirmation from those descriptions of the divine clemency with which the Scriptures abound ; from its being said that the mercy of the Lord endureth for ever, that he will not forsake the works of his hands, that he will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth ; and from our Lord's employing, Matt. xxv. 46, as the name of the everlasting punishment reserved for the wicked, the word xo^.a^ij, which is the vox signata in Greek for that kind of punishment which is meant for the correction of him who has behaved ill, that he may behave better in time to come, and which may be called everlasting, if it endures without intermission till he be corrected. This opinion, concerning the final reformation of the wicked by means of the punishments of a future state, is traced back to Origen, a father of the third century, to whose extensive erudition and indefatigable industry, the Christian world is much indebted, but whose fancy, which in many respects was not tutored and chastised by sound judgment, produced various mystical interpretations of Scripture, and whose intimate acquaintance with the heathen philo- sophy was often employed to adulterate the simplicity of the gospel. The Platonic and Stoic philosophers spoke of a certain period of ages, to which we arc accustomed to give the name of annus niagnus, after the completion of which they conceived that all things would 502 EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. return to the state in which they were at the creation. It is not agreed amongst the learned, whether Origen adopted this idea so completely as to believe that there is a succession of worlds, a resolu- tion of all things into their first principles, and a reproduction of them in continual rotation. But he certainly believed that the punishments of the wicked in a future state would, after some ages, produce an amendment of character, and that in consequence of this amendment, all the spirits who had endured these punishments would in time, some at a nearer, and some at a more remote period, join those spirits who had suffered nothing after death. The authority of Origen gave a degree of currency to this opinion. It is said to have been held by some writers in the dark ages. It was revived about two hundred years ago by its conformity to the leading principles of Socinianism ; and, not to mention many smaller treatises, it was lately exhibited in a most elegant and pleasing dress, in a French book entitled, " Le plan de Dieu envers les hommes, par Petit Pierre." This opinion has not been confined to Socinians. Many who hold the doctrine of atonement have discovered a propensity to embrace an opinion, which seems lo magnify the effect of the inter- position of Christ ; at least they are disposed to consider the eternity of hell torments as a problematical point which the Scriptures have not decided ; and some benevolent writers have laboured to bring forth an idea, which they call in a Scripture phrase the restitution of all things. It appears to them that so glorious a being as the Son of God must have come into the world, and endured the sufferings which marked his life, for some design more excellent, and more Avorthy of the Father of all than the redemption of a part of mankind. They suppose, therefore, that his mediation is operating, altliough they cannot explain how, for the universal restoration of the human race ; that he is the agent employed in extirpating moral evil from the creation of God ; that this is the reason of the name given him in the Septuagint translation of a part of the celebrated prophecy of the INIeSSiah, in Isaiah ix. xat xa^^^T'tt^ to ovofta avfon, MfyaZ-j^j [JouXj^'i ayysTLo; : not as it is rendered in our English Bibles, " His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor," but " His name shall be called the messenger of the great design ;" that his kingdom shall continue till the great design be accomplished ; and that when he has made an end of sin, and reconciled all things in heaven and earth to his Father, he will deliver up the kingdom; and righteousness, peace, and happiness will for ever pervade the whole intelligent creation. These are delightful prospects ; and a heart, which is disposed by its own good affections to take an interest in the prosperity of other beincrs, is ready to entertain them upon very slender evidence. But it is of much importance for students in divinity to remember that these prospects do not constitute an essential part of theology. They extend far, very far indeed, beyond the limits of our observation or our capacities. They rest upon conjectures, not upon reasoning ; upon incidental expressions of Scripture, which admit of other inter- pretations ; upon analogies which even when they are most pointed and numerous, amount only to probability, which are easily over- strained by a mind elevated witli the magnificence of the subject, or warmed with philanthropy, and which, without much caution, lead EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. 503 to fanciful theories, and to conclusions that are found to be false. Whenever we presume to determine what is proper to be done in the government of the universe, we attempt to comprehend a subject, which embraces numberless relations that are perfectly unknown to us. Such speculations may be pleasing, and they may be plausible ; but they are the speculations of creatures who forget that they " are but of yesterday and know nothing," and who, stepping beyond the humble and sober province that is allotted to man, presume to instruct the Ancient of days. It is the character of sound theology, not to subject the administration of God to our conjectures and theories ; but, in the firm persuasion that he is able to do all his pleasure, and that he will do that which is right, to inquire with reverence and with diligence what he has done, and what he has said he will do, and to make the information which Scripture affords upon these points, the measure of our hopes, and the rule of our conduct. Although, therefore, I judge it proper, in opening that great division of the subjects of theological controversy upon which we now enter, to mention speculations that have been indulged concerning the final condition of those who reject the salvation of the gospel, it is not to be supposed that these speculations constitute the points which divide the opinions of the Christian world in regard to the extent of the remedy. They are the speculations of individual writers, or they arise incident- ally from general systems. But they are not the characteristical tenets of any great body of Christians ; and whatever similarity there may appear in the name, the questions concerning universal and particular redemption have a very different object. With these questions I begin the statement of that system of doc- trine in regard to the extent of the remedy, which is called Calvinistic, by holding which, the Church of Scotland is distinguished from the Arminians, from the Lutheran churches, and from a very great part of the members of the Church of England. Leland's View of the Debtical Writers. Shaw's Philosophy of Judaism. Clarke's Evidences and Sermons. Law's Theory of Religion. Jortin's Discourses. Warburton's Divine Legation of Moses. Kurd's Sermons. I JO BOOK IV. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. CHAPTER VL PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. Br the Calvinistic tenets is meant that system of doctrine with regard to the extent of the remedy, which distinguishes those who embrace all the opinions of Calvin, from those Christians who agree with him only as to the divinity of Christ and the atonement, I shall not attempt to open the whole system at once ; but I shall go step by step through the points of difference between it and other systems, in the order which appears to me the most natural. In this way we shall not reach all the parts of the Calvinistic system, till we have gone through the third great division of the subjects of theological controversy, I mean the application of the remedy ; and we shall then be able, by a short retrospective view of the ground over which we have travelled, to form a precise connected idea of the whole. Accord- ing to this manner of exhibiting the Calvinistic system, I begin with stating the question concerning universal and particular redemption ; in other words, whether Christ died for all men, or only for those who shall finally be saved by him. The two sides of this question do not imply any difference of opinion with regard to the sufficiency of the death of Christ, or with regard to the number and character of those who shall eventually be saved. They who hold the one and the other side of the question agree, that although tl>e sufferings of Christ have a value sufficient to atone for the sins of all the children of Adam, from the beginning to the end of time, yet those only shall be saved by this atonement who repent and believe in him. But they differ as to the destination of the death of Christ ; whether in the purpose of the Father and the 45 3X 505 506 PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. will of the Son it respected all mankind, or only those persons to whom the benefit of it is at length to be applied. The doctrine of universal redemption is mentioned as one of the distinguishing tenets of the Pelagians. It forms the subject of one of the five points which comprehend the Arminian system. It is held by all the Lutheran churches. It seems to be taught in one of the articles of the church of England, and several parts of the Liturgy; and it is avowed by the great body of English divines as the doctrine of Scripture and of their church. This doctrine will be understood from the second of the five Arminian points, which is thus expressed: "Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all men, and for every individual, so as to obtain for all, by his death, reconciliation and remission of sins ; upon this condition, however, that none in reality enjoys the benefit of this remission but the man who believes." Dr. Whitby, in his discourse on the five points, thus explains the doc- trine: "When we say Christ died for all, we do not mean that he hath purchased actual pardon or reconciliation or life for all ; this being in effect to say that he procured an actual remission of sins to unbelievers, and actually reconciled God to the impenitent and dis- obedient, which is impossible. He only, by his death, hath put all men in a capacity of being justified and pardoned, and so of being reconciled to, and having peace with God, upon their turning to God, and having faith in our Lord Jesus Christ ; the death of Christ having rendered it consistent with the justice and wisdom of God, with the honour of his Majesty, and with the ends of government, to pardon the penitent believer." According to this doctrine, the death of Christ is an universal remedy for that condition in which the posterity of Adam are involved by sin — a remedy equally intended for the benefit of all. It removes the obstacles which the justice of God opposed to their deliverance. It puts all into a condition in which they may be saved, and it leaves their actual salvation to depend upon their faith. The remedy may in this way be much more extensive than the application of it. But even although the offer of pardon were rejected by all, it would not follow that the atonement made by the death of Christ was unneces- sary, for the offer could not have been given without it ; and what- ever reception the gospel may meet with, the love of God is equally conspicuous in having provided a method by which he may enter into a new covenant whh all who had sinned. This doctrine appears to represent the Father of all in a light most suitable to that character, as regarding his children with an equal eye, providing, without respect of persons, a remedy for their disease, and extending his compassion as far as their misery reaches. And it appears to represent the satisfaction which Christ offered to Divine justice, as opening a way for the love of God to the whole human race being made manifest by the most enlarged exercise of mercy. These views are supported by the general strain of Scripture, and by many very significant expressions which occur in the New Testa- ment.* It is said that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world ; that he died for all ; that he gave himself a ransom for all ; that he tasted * John i. 29 ; iiL 16. 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; iv. 10. 3 Pet. iii. 9. PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. 507 death for every man.* The extent of the grace of God in our justifi- cation seems to be compared witii the extent of the ctfects of Adam's sin in our condemnution.t Large societies of persons professing Christianity, all of wiiom we cannot suppose to be of the number of tliose who shall be finally saved, are addressed in the Epistles as those for whom Cin-ist gave himself; and there are expressions in some of the Epistles which seem to intimate that lie died even for those who perish.+ False teaciiers, who brought in damnable heresies, are said, 2 Pet. ii. 1, to have been bought by the Lord. All to whom the gospel is revealed are commanded to believe in Christ for the remis- sion of sins, which seems to imply that he has made atonement for their sins ; and to give thanks for Christ, which seems to imply that he is an universal Saviour, Jesus marvelled at the unbelief of tliose among whom lie hved ; he upbraided them because they repented not ; lie besought men to come to him ; and he bewailed the folly of the Jews, saying, as he wept over their city, " if thou hadst known in this thy day the tilings which belong to thy peace."§ Even the Ahiiighty, both in tlie Old and in the New Testament, condescendi* to use entreaties and expostulations, as well as commands^ " What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done in it ? 0 that my people had hearkened unto me !"|| "God hath given unto us," says the Apostle, " the ministry of reconciliation, to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. "II The establishment of a gospel ministry continues this ambassadorship in every Christian country, and may be regarded as a standing witness of the universality of redemption, because these expostulations, which the servants of Christ are commissioned to use in the name of God, appear to be without meaning, unless we suppose that God hath done every thing on his part, and that it rests only with us to embrace the remedy which is offered. In giving this general view of the arguments by which the advocates for the doctrine of universal redemption support their opinion, I have separated them as much as possible from those more intricate questions of theology which will meet us as we advance. But even from the .simple manner in which I have stated them, it is plain that they admit of much amplification. Some of them are susceptible of rhetorical embellishment ; others lead into a large field of Scripture criticism : and there are others, the force of which cannot be estimated till after a review of the whole Calvinistic system. These arguments are spread out at length, not only by professed Arminian writers, but by many English divines, particularly in Barrow's Sermons upon the doctrine of universal redemption, and in the second of Whitby's dis- courses upon the five points, entitled the Extent of Christ's Redemp- tion. These two writers have given a collection of all the texts of Scripture which appear to establish this doctrine, and a very favour- • John vi. 51. 1 Tim. ii. C. Heb. ii. 9. 1 John ii. 2. f Rom. V. 18. i 1 Cor. viii, 11. Rom. xiv. 15. § Mark vi. 6. Matth. xi. 20, 28. Luke xix. 41, 42. a Isa. V. 4. Psal. Ixxxi. 13. ^ 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, 20. 508 PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. able specimen of the mode of reasoning by which it is commonly- supported. Any person who examines with candour the arguments now stated, will acknowledge that they have considerable weight. I mention this, because I do not know any lesson more becoming students of divinity, than this — not to despise the reasonings of those with whose opinions they do not entirely agree. The longer they study theologi- cal controversy with that sobriety and fairness of mind which is essential to the character of every inquirer after truth, they will perceive the more clearly how little acquainted with the weakness of the human understanding, and with the intricacy of many of the points that have divided the Christian world, are those who state their opinions in the petulant dogmatical manner often assumed by smat- terers in knowledge, as if there were not a shadow of reason but upon their own side. In the question which we are now treating, it requires a thorough acquaintance with the Calvinistic system, and much compass of thought, to apprehend the full force of the answers that may be given to the arguments for universal redemption ; and I warn you rather to wait for the conviction which will arise from a view of all the parts of that system, than to expect that arguments equally plausible, in favour of particular redemption, are immediately to be stated. The following observations, however, will, upon reflection, open the sources of these arguments. 1. Those who hold that the destination and intention of the death of Christ respected only such as shall finally be saved by him, appear to be warranted by many expressions which occur in the New Tes- tament ; such as the following : John x. 11, 15, "I lay down my life for the sheep ;" that is, as the expression is explained in the context, for those who "hear and follow me;" John xi. 52 ; xv. 12, 13, 14 ; Eph. V. 25. 2. As the persons, to whom the intention of Christ's death appears in such expressions to be restrained, are found in all places of the world, there is a propriety and significancy in the general phrases employed elsewhere to denote them : and when some of the texts commonly urged in proof of universal redemption are examined par- ticularly, there will be discovered, in the context, circumstances v%'hich indicate that the general expressions there used were intended to mark the indiscriminate extension of the blessings of the Gospel to men of all nations. Thus, because the benefit of the Jewish sacrifices was confined to that nation, John the Baptist, when he saw Jesus coming to him, marked him out to the people as " the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world ;"* that is, of all those in every place who are forgiven. — So John, in his first epistle, speaking as a Jew, says of Jesus, " he is the propitiation for our sins ; and not for ours only," that is, not for the sins of us Jews only, "but also for the sins of the whole world."t — So the apostle Paul says of Jesus, he " gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. "J But if we attend to the scope of the discourse, of which these words make a part, which is an exhortation to pray for all men, and a command to all men in every place to pray, it will be perceived that the apos- * John i. 29. f 1 John ii. 2. f 1 Tim. ii. 6. PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. 509 tie's argument does not necessarily require any farther meaning to be atfixed to tliese words than this, — that Christ gave himself a ransom not merely for that peculiar people, who are sometimes called in the Old Testament the " ransomed of the Lord," but for all hi every place who shall obtain redemption. 3. Although deliverance from the evils of sin, the great blessing purchased by the death of Christ, is peculiar to those who shall finally be saved by him, yet there are blessings which the publication of the Gospel has imparted to others ; and there is strict propriety in saying that the love of God to mankind which appears in creation and providence, and by which God is good to all, has produced the manifestation and the death of Clu'ist, although the benefits intended by that event for those who shall finally be saved are very much superior to the benefits which it may be the instrument of conveying to the whole human race. To a great part of the world the Gospel has communicated the most valuable knowledge : it has delivered many nations from gross superstition and idolatry ; it has explained the duties of men more clearly than any other method of instruction : it furnishes restraints upon vice and incentives to virtuous exertion, that are unknown to civil legislation ; and by all these methods it con- tributes to the prosperity of society, and to the welfare of the indi- vidual. These common benefits of Christianity are sufficient to explain many expressions in the epistles addressed to Christian societies, without our being obliged to suppose that all the members of these societies were in the end to inherit eternal life. In respect of these common benefits, we understand the following passages, Heb. vi. 4, Heb. x. 29, and 2 Peter ii. 1. For all who had an opportunity of hearing the Gospel, had tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come ; they were sanctified through the blood of the covenant ; and, in the language of Peter in his first epistle, they were " redeemed with the blood of Christ, from their vain conver- sation which they had received by tradition from their fathers." Amongst the number thus redeemed, were the false teachers of whom he speaks in his second epistle. They had relinquished the errors in which they were educated : they had professed themselves the serv- ants of Jesus, and were bound to him as their Lord ; but by bringing in damnable heresies, they denied the Lord that bought them. The apostle Paul seems to refer to this distinction between the common benefits which all professing Christians derive from the death of Christ, and the complete salvation of those who are called his sheep and his friends, when he says, 1 Tim. iv. 10, " God is the Saviour of all men ;" not only in respect of his persevering providence, but in respect of that xa^^'-i ffwf »?ctoj which, through the kindness and love of God our Saviour, hath appeared to all men ; — " specially of them that believed," that is, he is in a much more eminent sense the Saviour of them that believe, than of other men. 4. It should be considered, that although the advocates for uni- versal redemption do not allow that there is any weight in the two preceding observations, yet they are obliged, upon their own princi- ples, to admit that many of those expressions, from which they infer that Christ died intentionally for all men, require a limitation. For if faith in Christ be the condition upon which men become partakers 45* 510 PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. of the propitiation which he offered to God, it seems to follow that all who have not the means of attaining this faith are excluded from the benefit of the propitiation. But it is certain that the ancient heathen world did not know the nature of that dispensation, the promise of which was confined to the Jews ; and it is manifest that a great part of the world at this day have never heard of the Gospel. Were the offer of pardon that is contained in the Gospel actually made to all the children of Adam, there would be an appearance of truth in say- ing that all men were thereby put into a condition in which they might be saved, and that it depended upon themselves whether or not they embraced the offer. But if the efficacy of the remedy is inseparably connected with its being accepted, it cannot be, in the intention of the Almighty, an universal remedy,since he has withheld the means of accepting it from many of those for whom it was said to have been provided. The words of the apostle, then, " God will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth, must receive from the event an interpretation different from that which is the most obvious ; and all the other texts urged in favour of universal redemption are in like manner limited by the imperfect publication of the Gospel. The Arminians themselves acknowledge that there is a secret which they cannot penetrate, — a deep and un- searchable counsel, in leaving so many nations without the possibility of attaining to the truth ; and all their attempts to reconcile an inten- tion in God to save the inhabitants of these nations, with the gross- ness of the superstition in which they are involved, and the insuperable obstacles which education, example, habit, and situation oppose to their believing in Christ, are unsatisfying and defective ; because they either proceed upon the principles of the Socinian doctrine, that men may every where be saved by acting up to the light of nature, or they approach to some parts of the Calvinistic system, respecting the effectual and irresistible operation of the grace of God upon the soul ; which the Arminians profess to renounce. 5. To those who hold the doctrine of particular redemption it ap- pears that the event, in those countries where the gospel has been published, clearly indicates that there was not, in the Almighty, an intention of saving all men by the death of Christ. For it is plain that many of those who have every opportunity of believing in Christ either reject his religion, or show by their conduct that they do not possess that faith which entitles them to partake in the benefits of ins death. With regard to them, therefore, his death is in vain ; and if God intended that they should be saved, his intention fails of its effect. But it seems when we hold such a language, that we speak in a manner unbecoming our circumstances, and inconsistent with those views of the Almighty which are suggested by reason, and are clearly taught in Scripture. "Known to God are all his works from the beginning." The whole scheme of the universe, which derived its existence from his pleasure, was present to the Creator at the instant when he said, " Let 1 here be light." The actions of his creatures, which form a most important part of tiiat scheme, were to him the object of 'a foreknowledge infinitely more clear and certain than our knowledge of that which is before our eyes. The perfections of his nature exclude the possibility of any change in the divine mind ; and PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. 511 those events which to us appear the most unexpected and irregular, fulfil " the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will." If these views of the Almighty are just, and if our minds are able to follow out the consequences which necessarily result from them, we cannot conceive him susceptible of that disappointment, regret, and alteration of measures which we often experience by the failure of our schemes ; but we must admit that the original intention of the Creator and Ruler of the universe always coincides with the event which takes place under his administration. Since many, therefore, to whom the gospel is published, appear, as far as we can judge from our own observation, and from the complaints of Scripture, to remain under the wrath of God, we do not seem to draw an unwarrantable conclusion, when we infer from the event, that it was not a part of the intention of the Almighty to deliver them from wrath by the death of his Son. In the same manner as many who have the means of improvement do not attain knowledge or skill, and some who have talents and opportunities for rising to wealth and honour pass their days in obscurity and indigence ; so many to whom the offer of eternal life is made through Jesus Christ put it far from them. In both cases the blessings of God are abused, and men do not reap the temporal and spiritual benefits, which, had it not been for their own fault, they might have reaped ; but in neither case is the intention of God dis- appointed. For he foresaw the use which they would make of his blessings, and all the consequences of their conduct entered into the plan of his government. These views of the Almighty seem to correct that desire of magni- fying the love of God to mankind, which has led many to ascribe to him an intention of saving all men, although he knew that a great part of the human race were not to be saved. They seem to suggest, in place of this defective intention, a destination more worthy of the sovereignty of the Creator, — a destination of saving those who shall in the end be saved ; and there are many places of Scripture in which the destination, that we are led in this manner to deduce from the perfection of the divine nature, seems to be intimated. I refer at present only to John vi. where our Lord says repeatedly, that he gave his life for the world, and where he speaks also of those whom the Father hath given him. " The bread of God is he who cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. The bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. All that the Father giveth mc shall come to me. This is the Father's will, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." Here are the doctrines of particular and of universal redemption seemingly taught in the same discourse. The expressions of the one kind must be employed to qualify the expressions of the other kind ; and it cannot be said that we pervert Scripture, when, adhering to the particular destination of saving those who shall be saved, which reason teaches and Jesus Christ declares, we give the other expressions such an interpretation as renders them consistent with that destination. This fifth observation has conducted us to the threshold of those intricate questions in theology, which arise out of the difierent con- 512 PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. ceptions formed by Christians of the nature and the manner of the divine foreknowledge. To the views entertained of this attribute, we may trace the different opinions concerning the doctrine of predes- tination ; and therefore from this point I shall begin, under a deep sense of the difficulty of the subject, and of the reverence and humility with which it becomes us to speak of the counsels of the Almighty, to state these opinions. Barrow's Sermons. Whitby on the Arminian Points. OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 513 CHAPTER VII. OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. Section I. The opinion which is to be stated first, because it appears to be the most simple, may be called the Socinian. It is the system of those who attempt to get rid of all the difficulties in which the divine foreknowledge seems to involve the subject, by denying that this attribute belongs to the Almighty to the extent in which it is usually understood. Socinus and his immediate followers admitted that God knows all things which are knowable. But they abridged the objects of divine knowledge, by withdrawing from that number those events whose future existence they considered as uncertain. Their manner of reasoning was this. Every thing that now is, has a real existence, which is the subject of knowledge. Every thing that is past had at some former time a real existence, which is also the subject of know- ledge. Every thing that is necessarily to happen at some future time may be known by a mind capable of tracing the nature of the con- nexion, by which it proceeds out of that which now is. Thus all the changes in the material world arise, according to certain general laws, out of its present condition. If any being, therefore, is perfectly acquainted with that condition, and with the operation of those laws, he sees the future in the present ; and, in general, every event, the futurition of which is certain, may be the subject of infallible know- ledge. But there are events which appeared to Socinus contingent, in this sense of the word, that they do not arise from any thing pre- ceding, as their cause. They may be, or they may not be ; and as he thought that they were not certainly future, he thought also that it was impossible for any being to know certainly beforehand that they were to happen. Amongst this number he ranked the determinations of free agents, all those actions which proceed from the will of man. For as the actions of men follow the choice which they have made, and as he who chose one thing might have chosen another, it appears that there is no previous circumstance necessarily and unavoidably producing this or that action ; and from hence Socinus inferred that every thing done by men acting freely is, by its nature, incapable of 3 Y 514 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. being the subject of that iiifalUble foreknowledge commonly ascribed to the Almighty. According to this system, there cannot be any such degree with regard to the salvation of particular persons as is meant by the word predestination. For as the remission of sins is connected in Scripture with faith and repentance, and as the determinations of free agents are supposed to be unknown to God, he must be ignorant whether any persons will attain that character, without which they cannot be saved. The only decree respecting the salvation of men, which Socinus admits to have been made from the beginning, and to be unchangeable, is this general conditional decree, that whosoever repents and believes in Jesus shall have eternal life. This decree is applied to particular persons, when they appear to possess the charac- ter which it describes ; and by this application, what in its original form was merely the declaration of a condition, becomes an absolute peremptory decree, giving eternal life to those who have been faithful unto death. But it is unknown to God what number of such persons there may be, or whether there may be any. Although he has pro- vided means for the recovery of mankind, he is as ignorant of the efficacy or the result of these means as any of the children of men ; and all the expressions in Scripture, which we are accustomed to consider as spoken after the manner of men, are understood by Socinus to be the literal descriptions of the state of a being, who waits with anxiety for what men will do, who is grieved at tlieir obstinacy, who repents that he has done so much for them, and who is liable to meet with total disappointment in the end which he pro- posed to himself. If this system appears to remove some of the difficulties which attend other systems, it purchases this advantage by bringing the character of the Deity so far down to a level with human weakness, as to sap the foundations of religion. If God does not foresee the determinations of free agents, he cannot foresee the consequences of their determinations. But if it be considered how very much the state of the moral world depends upon actions that proceed from choice, how far the history of the human race has, from the beginning, been affected by the conduct of creatures who might have acted otherwise, we must be sensible that a being who had not the fore- knowledge of that conduct was, from the beginning, ignorant of by much the greatest part of the transactions that were to take place in the world which he made. The whole train of prosperous and calamitous events that were to befal families and nations was hidden from his eyes. Instead of appearing in the exalted light of the author of a plan by which the affairs of the universe are ordained and arranged for the good of his creatures, he becomes a spectator of unlooked-for occurrences, and his power and w-isdom are employed merely in directing events as they arise to his view. His measures are perpetually traversed by evils which he had not foreseen ; and while he is occupied from day to day in applying remedies to the disorders which he discovers in different parts of liis works, new emergencies show that some other remedy might have been better suited to the case. From the following expressions of Socinus, it will appear that I OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 515 have not exaggerated, in painting that degradation of the Deity which necessarily results from abridging his foreknowledge. — " No ab- surdity," says Socinus, " will follow from supposing that God does not know all things before they happen. For of what use is this know- ledge ? Is it not enough that God perpetually governs all things, and that nothing can be done against his will ; that he is always so present by his wisdom and power, that he can both discern the attempts of men, and hinder them if he pleases ; that he can turn all that man can do to his own glory ; and that he may, when he sees proper, appoint beforehand in what manner he shall accommodate his actions to the attempts which man may make ?"* The answer to all such questions is this, that it is irreverent, and contrary to the idea of an infinitely perfect Being, to ask ; is it not enough for him, that even we are able to form the notion of a much higher degree of perfection than is stated in the questions ; that the characters of Creator and Ruler of the universe imply much more ; and that the Scriptures uniformly ascribe to God the foreknowledge of the determinations of free agents? The moral conduct of many individuals was foretold before they were born ; the behaviour of the people of Israel for a succession of ages, the treatment which they were to receive from the Egyptians, the Babylonians, and other nations ; the peculiar kinds of wickedness which were to prevail in the neighbouring kingdoms ; the obstinacy of the Jews in rejecting the Messiah ; the circumstances of his sufferings ; the destruction of Jerusalem, and the corruptions of Christianity, — all these are the subjects of predictions so particular, as to show the most intimate knowledge of the future sentiments and actions of men ; for the events which I have enumerated, and many others which occur in reading the prophetical parts of Scripture, are of such a kind that they derive their complexion and character, not from any circumstances in the material world, but from the volitions and determinations of the free agents, who were concerned in bringing them about. It cannot be said that the predictions of Scripture declare only what is probable. For, besides the apparent improbability of many of the events foretold, and the immense extent of time, and space, and operation, to which the predictions reach, it is obvious that all of them are delivered, not in the language of conjecture, but with the most solemn asseveration, in the name of the God of truth ; and it is hard to form any conception more unworthy of the Supreme Being, than that he should conduct his government by declaring as certain, future events, concerning which he himself, at the time of the declaration, was doubtful. Socinus, and some later writers who tread in his steps, sensible that the probability of the events foretold does not afford a satisfying ac- count of the predictions that are found in Scripture, have recourse to a system, with regard to the exertion of the divine foreknowledge in particular cases, of which I shall endeavour to give a fair exposition. They hold that God is able to foresee future events whensoever he pleases, because he can make a particular ordination with respect to them ; by which means, events in their own nature contingent be- * Socini Praelect. cap. 8. 516 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. come certainly future, and so are the subject of infallible foreknow- ledge. Thus many blessings foretold in Scripture are good things which God had resolved to send by the actions of men : many evils foretold are punishments which he had resolved to inflict by the same means ; many sins foretold are the consequence of his punishing for- mer sin, by withdrawing that grace which would have restrained from future transgression ; and the whole series of predictions, that respect the Messiah, results from the ordination of the Almighty con- cerning the deliverance of mankind. But we must not infer, it is said, from those extraordinary cases in which God chooses to fore- ordain, and consequently to foresee what is future, that his foreknow- ledge of future events is universal. The greater part of the deter- minations of free agents he leaves in their natural state of uncertainty : they may choose one course, or they may choose another ; and the course which they are to follow is unknown to him till they have made their choice. It is admitted by tlie framers of this new system, that the ordina- tion of God gives events that certainty which renders them capable of being foreknown ; and this principle is borrowed from that system of theology which it was their object to overturn. What is peculiar to them is, that they confine this ordination to particular extraordinary ■ cases, and suppose all others exempted from it. But a foreknowledge, exerted at some times and not at others, constitutes a most imperfect kind of government. For the occasion of its being exerted at any particular season can be nothing else but the state of the world at that season ; but as this state arises out of that which went before, and as the propriety of the measures taken in reference to it is very much affected by that which is to come after, a being, who is sup- posed ignorant of the great series of events in the universe, is un- qualified for making any extraordinary interposition. The framers of the new system were obliged to account for the multitude of pre- dictions respecting the Messiah, by ascribing the whole scheme of his appearance to the ordination of the Almighty. But that scheme, according to the account given of it in Scripture, embraces the intro- duction, the propagation, and the removal of sin, i. e. the whole his- tory of the determinations of the human race, or of their moral conduct from the beginning to the end of time. The ordination of this scheme, therefore, necessarily includes the foreknowledge of the moral conduct of men ; and we cannot withdraw that moral conduct from the number of the objects foreknown by God, without suppos- ing that he was unacquainted with the reasons of that scheme which we allow that he ordained. It appears, then, that the partial admission of the divine foreknow- ledge, to which necessity has driven the Socinians, does not answer the purpose for which it was resorted to ; and that this system car- ries with it its own confutation, in presuming to restrict the opera- tions of the Supreme Mind. Reason and Scripture concur in teaching that no bounds can be set to the Almighty. Our faculties may be unable to rise to the exalted conception of a" Supreme Mind, to Avhom all things that have been, that now are, and that shall be, are equally present. But the plain declarations of Scripture supersede our specu- lations. There we read that all his works are known to him from OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 517 the beginning ;* that all things are naked and open in his sight ;t that the purposes of his heart endure throughout all generations. J T'^e power of foretelling future events, which reason teaches to be essen- tial to his nature, is there claimed by him as his prerogative ;§ it is often occasionally exerted in uttering predictions : and as well from the nature of these predictions, as from the manner in which the power is elsewhere spoken of, we are led to conclude that it implies a perception of all the actions of his creatures, which is not subject to mistake, which is incapable of receiving any accession, and which extends with equal clearness and facility through every portion of space, and every point of duration. That abridgment of tlie objects of the divine foreknowledge, which was first introduced by Socinus, and is peculiar to those who follow him, has not been adopted by all who are called Socinians. Dr. Priestley writes thus, in the first part of his Institutes of Natural and Revealed Religion, which treats of the being and attributes of God. " God having made all things, and exerting his influence over all things, must know all things, and consequently be omniscient. Also, since he not only ordained, but constantly supports all the laws of nature, he must be able to foresee what will be the result of them, at any distance of time ; just as a man who makes a clock can tell when it will strike. All future events, therefore, must be as perfectly known to the Divine Mind as those that are present ; and as we cannot con- ceive tiiat he should be liable to forgetfulness, we may concluJe that all things, past, present, and to come, are equally known to him ; so that his knowledge is infinite." Dr. Priestley takes no notice of the distinction which Socinus made between those events which, arisinar from necessary causes, are certainly to be, and those which Socinus called contingent, such as the determinations of free agents. The reason is, that Dr. Priestley, being a professed materialist, considered the operations of mind as taking place according to the same laws of nature with the motions of body. There does not appear to him any more uncertainty in the one than in the other, and therefore both are, in his opinion, equally the objects of divine foreknowledge. If the doctrine of the universal prescience of God unavoidably involves the principles of materialism, it must be renounced by all who hold that the soul is essentially dis- tinct from the body. But if the doctrine can be defended without having recourse to these principles, it is not a sound argument against the truth of the doctrine, whatever discredit it may thereby suffer in the opinion of the ignorant or careless, that a materialist finds it per- fectly reconcileable with his system. Section II. Arminius, who lived in the beginning of the seventeenth century, may be regarded as the founder of the system of opinions generally held by those, who, while they admit the dignity of our Saviour's per- * Acts XV. 18. t Heb. iv. 13. t Ps. xxxiii. II. § Isa. xlvi. 9, 10. 46 518 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. son, and the doctrine of atonement, do not hold the other doctrines of Calvinism. He and his followers renomiced the peculiar tenets of So- cinus with regard to the divine prescience. They considered the most contingent future events as known to God : but the power, by which such events are foreknown, appears to them essentially different from the foresight of those events, which arise by a continued chain of causes. It is a power of which they do not pretend to form any distinct concep- tion, which they are content to resolve into the supereminent excel- lence of the divine nature, and the existence of which they do not attempt to establish by reasoning, but simply deduce from experience. The Scriptures, we have seen, abound with predictions of a series of contingent events, involving numberless determinations of free agents. But if contingent events were certainly foretold, it is manifest that they were certainly foreknown by that Being from whom the predic- tion proceeded ; and if the fact be once established, that God fore- knows contingent events, it is admitted by the Arminians, that all the difficulty, which we feel in accounting for the manner of the fact, does not constitute any argument against the truth of (he fact. So- cinus proceeded upon a maxim which has been repeated after Aris- totle in many a system of logic. — De futuris contingentihus non datur determinata Veritas. ■ Entertaining no doubt of the truth of this maxim, he apprehended that the certain foreknowledge of events destroyed their contingency, and therefore he concluded it to be im- possible, or a contradiction in terms, for contingent events to be cer- tainly foreknown. But Arminius and his followers learnt to correct the maxim of Aristotle ; and it is now universally understood amongst philosophers, that future events, which are in their own nature con- tingent, may be certain, and consequently may be foreknown. This will be understood from a familiar example. Whether I am to write a letter to-morrow or not is a matter purely contingent. If no foreign cause interpose to take from me the power which I now possess, I may write, or I may refrain from writing. Both events are equally possible ; but one of the events will certainly happen; and of the two propositions, I wiU write to-morrow, I will not write to-morrow, one, although I do not know which, is at this moment true. The truth which now exists, whether it be perceived by any being or not, will be known at the end of to-morrow to me, and to any person who attends to my employments through the day : and if there is any being who possesses the faculty of knowing the truth beforehand, the determination of my mind is not in the least affected by his know- ledge. Although it is certain when the day begins what I am to do, and although the event which is then certain may be known to some being whose understanding is more enlarged than mine, I feel no restraint through the course of the day ; but I write or I do not write, I read or I do not read, I go abroad or I remain at home, according to circumstances. We say, then, that contingency is inconsistent with that necessary determination to one event which excludes the possibility of another ; but we say that it is not inconsistent with the certainty, that of two events, either of which might happen, one is to happen ; and there- fore we hold there is no contradiction in saying that a contingent event may be certainly foreknown. For as Dr. Clarke writes, " Fore- OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 519 knowledge has no influence at all upon the thmgs foreknown ; and it has therefore no influence upon them, because things would be just as they were, and no otherwise, though there were no foreknowledge. It does not cause things to be. — The futurity of free actions is exactly the same, and in the nature of the things themselves, of the like cer- tainty in event, whether they can, or whether they could not, be fore- known."* It is this possibility of foreseeing future contingencies, such as are the determinations of free agents, which distinguishes the Arminian system of predestination from the Socinian. Both systems proceed upon the general declaratory decree, that " whosoever believeth in Jesus Christ shall be saved," as the first in order, and as becoming peremptory with regard to every individual after he has persevered in faith. But whereas the Socinian scheme supposes the number and the names of the individuals that shall be saved, to have been from the beginning unknown to God, and consequently the decrees respect- ing them to be made at such times as their faith appears to him, the Arminians do not conceive so unworthily of God as to think that any thing new and unexpected can present itself to his mind, and that his decrees are successively made according to emergencies ; but they consider all the grounds upon which the conditional decree is at length to become peremptory with regard to uidividuals, as from the begin- ning known to God. The amount of their tenets may be thus shortly stated : God, who wills all men to be saved, and who gave his Son to be the Saviour of the world, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, foresaw, before the foundation of the world, the use which men would make of the means of salvation provided for them in Christ. Upon the foresight of the faith and good works of some, he determined, from all eternity, to give them, upon account of Christ, and through Christ, eternal Ufe ; and upon the foresight of the unbelief and impenitence of others, he determined, from all eternity, to leave them in sin and subject to condemnation. According to this system, predestination, or the decree that some persons shall be saved, and others condemned, rests upon the pre- science of God, by which, says Arminius, in the declaration of his opinion, God knew, from eternity, what persons, under the adminis- tration of the means necessary for producing faith and repentance, were to believe, and what persons were not to believe. By all who hold this system, such a decree is represented as exhibiting at once the goodness and the justice of God : his goodness in providing a Saviour, and oflering the means of salvatioii ; his justice, in reward- ing men according to their works, giving eternal life to those who make a proper use of the means, and condemning only those who abuse them. There is, in the language of the Arminians, an antece- dent will in God to save all men ; that is, a will previous to the con- sideration of the circumstances of individuals, that all men may be saved; a will which does not rest in bare desire, what the schoolmen call V elk it as, hwi appears carried forth into action in tlie means which he has provided to accomplish the end. There is in God a conse- quent will to save only some persons, and to condemn others ; that is, * Sermon on Omniscience of GoJ. 520 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. a will consequent upon the consideration of the conduct of individuals, and corresponding to that conduct. The difference, say the Arminians, between the antecedent and the consequent will of God, is owing entirely to the sins of men ; every thing has been done by him that is necessary for their salvation ; and if they did their part, the ante- cedent and the consequent will of God would coincide, and all men would be saved. And thus, by admitting that the actions of moral agents may be free, although they are foreknown, and by building upon the divine foreknowledge of these free actions, the decree respecting the final condition of mankind, the honour of the divine perfections appears to be maintained ; the limitation of the extent of the remedy in the Gospel is seen to arise from no other cause but the fault of those to whom it is ofiered, and the strongest motives are held forth to engage us to "give all diligence in making our election sure." But plausi- ble and unexceptionable as this system at first sight appears, there are difficulties under which it labours, and imperfections that adhere to it, which will open upon us by degrees as we proceed in the expo- sition of the Calvinistic system of predestination. Section III. The characteristical feature of the Calvinistic system is, that entire dependence of the creature upon the Creator, which it uni- formly asserts, by considering the Avill of the Supreme Being as the cause of every thing that now exists, or that is to exist at any future time. This principle is fruitful of consequences which, when they are followed out and applied, give to the doctrines of Christianity that peculiar complexion known by the name of Calvinism ; and from this principle results that view of the divine prescience which is the ground-work of the doctrine of predestination that I am noAV to deli- neate. Of things impossible there can be no knowledge. The same character, by which they must remain for ever in the class of nonen- tities, so that not even omnipotence can bring them into existence, withdraws them from the number of those objects of which any mind can form a distinct conception. But all things that are possible may be conceived ; and the more perfect any understanding is, the more complete is the representation of things possible in that understanding. To the Supreme Mind, therefore, there are distinctly represented, not only all the single objects which may be brought into existence, but also all the possible combinations of single objects, their relations, and their mutual influences on the systems of which they may compose a part. Out of this representation of possibilities which is implied in the perfection of the divine understanding, the Supreme Being selects those single objects, and those combinations of objects, which he chooses to bring into existence ; and every circumstance in the man- ner of the existence of that which is to be, thus depending entirely on his will, is known to him, because he has decreed that it shall be. The representation of all things possible in the divine understanding OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 521 has been called by iheologians Scientia simpUcis intelUgcntix : and the knowledge which God, from eternity, had of all that ho was to produce has been called scientia visionis. Amongst the objects of the former knowledge are to be ranked all those things, the reality of which would have been the same, although no creature had ever been produced, such as the existence of God, his attributes, and all those abstract propositions which are eternally and immutably true. We attain the knowledge of abstract propositions by rising to tliem from the contemplation of particular objects : but this is a tedious method, suited to the imperfection of our natures. The truth of the propositions is totally independent of the existence of the particular objects by which they are suggested to us. That three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles would be true, although no triangle had ever been drawn. By a perfect mind the truth of such general propositions is recognised before the objects are produced ; and the knowledge which the Supreme Being has of the possibilities of things, necessarily involves a knowledge of these abstract proposi- tions ; because the very circumstance which renders the existence of many things impossible is, that they cannot exist without a contradic- tion to some of those abstract propositions which are always true. In defining scientia visionis, I called it the knowledge which God, from eternity, had of all that he was to produce. The reason why the words ' from eternity' were inserted in the definition, requires particu- lar attention upon this subject. Since the infinite perfection of the nature of God excludes the idea of change in his purposes, of increase to his knowledge, or of succession in his perception of objects, it fol- lows, that the choice, out of things possible, of those which he deter- liiined to bring into existence, was not made in time, at the successive periods at which his creatures appeared ; but that the whole plan of what was to be produced was forever present to his mind. There was a time when all the objects of the scientia visionis were future. At that time their futurition, that is, their being to pass in succession from the state of possibility to the state of existence, was known to God, merely as being the result of his own determination. After the execution of this determination commenced, some of the objects of the scientia visionis became past ; others became present, and others continued future. But all are equally in the view of the divine mind. There is to him no more fatigue or imperfection in the remembrance of what is past, or the foresight of what is future, than in the percep- tion of what now is. Indeed, there is an impropriety in using the M''ords remembrance or foresight, when we speak of the knowledge of God ; and it is only the narrowness of our conceptions, and the poverty of our language, which compel us to apply such terms to his clear, unvarying intuition of the whole series of objects which derive their existence from his pleasure. The two kinds of knowledge which have now been explained, are understood, in the Calvinistic system, to comprehend all that can be known. There are no conceivable objects but those of which it can be affirmed, either that they may be, or that they may not be. Of things which may not be, this only can 1)e distinctly known, that they are impossible ; and a being, who knows all the things that may be, knows also what are the things which may not be ; for every thing 46* " 3 Z 522 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. that does not enter into the complete representation of things possi- ble, which is present to his mind, is known, by that circumstance, to be impossible. Scienfia simplicis intelligentise, then, exhausts the subjects of knowledge, in respect of the possibility or impossibility of their existence ; but it does not imply any knowledge of the actual existence of those things which are possible ; for from this proposi- tion, a thing may be, this other proposition, it shall be, does by no means follow. Hence scientia simplicis intelligentise was called by the schoolmen scientia indefinita, as not determining the exist- ence or the non-existence of any object out of the Deity. But sci- entia visionis, on the other hand, was called scientia dejinita, because the existence of all the objects of this knowledge, whether they be past, present, or future, is determinate ; in .other Avords, it is not more certain that what is past has had an existence, and that what is pre- sent now exists, than that what God foresees as future shall exist hereafter. If, therefore, scientia visionis be joined to scientia sim- plicis intelligentiae, every thhig that can be known is comprehended; in other words, if nothing can exist without the will of the First Cause, and if the First Cause, who knows all things that are possible, knows also what things he wills to produce, then he knows every thiug. There is nothing that does not fall under one or other of these kinds of knowledge. We have already seen that all which can be known of things that may not be, belongs to the scientia simplicis ijitelligentix; and of the things that may be, either a thing is pos- sible, but not future, and then it belongs to this kind of knowledge also ; or it both may be, and shall be, and then it belongs to the sci- entia visionis. To state the thing still more plainly, all things which may exist are either things which shall be, or things which shall not be : the latter remain amongst things possible, the objects of scientia si7)iplicis intelligentix ; the former pass from the number of things barely possible into the number of the objects of scientia visio)iis. Those who consider all the objects of knowledge as comprehended under one or other of the kinds that have been explained, are natu- rally conducted to that enlarged conception of the extent of the divine decree, from which the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination unavoid- ably follows. The divine decree is the determination of the divine will to produce the universe, that is, the whole series of beings and events that were then future. The parts of this series arise in suc- cession ; but all were, from eternity, present to the divine mind ; and no cause that was at any time to operate, or no eftect that was at any time to be produced in the universe, can be excluded from the origi- nal decree, without supposing that the decree was at first imperfect, and afterwards received accessions. The determination to produce this world, understanding by that word the whole combination of beings, and causes, and effects, that were to come into existence, arose out of the view of all possible worlds, and proceeded upon reasons to us unsearchable, by which this world that now exists ap- peared to the divine wisdom the fittest to be produced. I say, the determination to produce this world proceeded upon reasons ; be- cause we must suppose that, in forming the decree, a choice was ex- erted, that the Supreme Being was at liberty to resolve either that he • would create, or that he would not create ; that he would give his OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 523 work this form or that form, as he chose ; otherwise we withdraw the universe from the direction of a Supreme Intelligence, and sub- ject all things to blind fatality. But if a choice was exerted in form- ing the decree, the choice must have proceeded upon reasons ; for a choice made by a wise being, without any ground of choice, is a contradiction in terms. At the same time it is to be remembered, that as nothing then existed but the Supreme Being, the only reason which could determine him in choosing what he was to produce, was its appearing to him fitter for accomplishing the end which he pro- posed to himself, than any thing else Avhich he might have produced. Hence scicntia visionis is called by theologians scientia libera. To scientia simplicis intelligentise they gave the epithet naturalis, be- cause the knowledge of all things possible arises necessarily from the nature of the Supreme INIind ; but to scientia visionis they gave the epithet libera, because the qualities and extent of its objects are de- termined, not by any necessity of nature, but by the will of the Deity. Although, in forming the divine decree, there was a choice of this world, proceeding upon a representation of all possible worlds, it is not to be conceived that there was any interval between the choice and the representation, or any succession in the parts of the choice. In the divine mind, there was an intuitive view of that immense subject, whicli it is not only impossible for our minds to comprehend at once, but in travelling through the parts of which we are instantly bewildered; and one decree, embracing at once the end and the means, ordained, with perfect wisdom, all that was to be. The condition of the human race entered into this decree. It is not, perhaps, the most important part of it when we speak of the for- mation of the universe, but it is a part which, even were it more in- significant than it is, could not be overlooked by the Almighty whose attention extends to all his works, and which appears, by those dis- pensations of his providence that have been made known to us, to be interesting in his eyes. A decree respecting the condition of the human race includes the history of every individual : the time of his appearing upon the earth ; the manner of his existence while lie is an inhabitant of the earth, as it is diversified by the actions which he performs, and by the events, whether prosperous or calamitous, which befall him ; and the manner of his existence after he leaves the earth, that is, his future happiness or misery. A decree respecting the con- dition of the human race also includes the relations of the individuals to one another : it fixes their connexions in society, which have a great influence upon their happiness and their improvement ; and it must be conceived as extending to the important events recorded in Scrip- ture, in which the whole species have a concern. Of this kind is the sin of our first parents, the consequence of that sin reaching to all their posterity, the mediation of Jesus Christ appointed by God as a remedy for these consequences, the final salvation, through this Me- diator, of one part of the descendants of Adam, and the final condem- nation of another part, notwithstanding the remedy. These events arise at long intervals of time, by a gradual preparation of circum- stances, and the operation of various means. But by the Creator, to whose mind the end and the means were at once present, these events were beheld in intimate connexion whh one another, and in conjunc- 524 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. tion with many other events to us unknown ; and consequently all of them, however far removed from one another as to the thne of their actual existence, were comprehended in that one decree by which he determined to produce the world. Hence it may be observed how idly they are employed, who pre- sume to settle the order of the divine decrees, and how insignificant are the controversies upon this subject, which in the days of our fathers divided those who were agreed as to the general principles of Calvin- ism. One side were called Supralapsarians, because in their concep- tions of the order of the divine decrees respecting the human race, they ascended above the fall, and considered God as regarding men before they were created, and as resolving to manifest his attributes by the whole series of events which he ordained concerning the race, from the creation of Adam till the consummation of all things. The other side were called Sublapsarians, because they rose no higher than the fall, but considered God as regarding men in the wretched situation to which that event had reduced them, as providing means for their re- covery, and as conducting some to eternal life by these means, while he left others in misery. The distinction was allowed, even at the time when it engrossed the attention of theologians, not to be es- sential : but the good sense of modern times has almost effaced the remembrance of it ; because it is now understood that we may em- ploy such illustrations and arrangements of the subject as we find most useful to assist our conceptions, and that we may differ from one another in these illustrations and arrangements, without forsaking the general principles which I have been delineating ; provided we remember that, although the narrowness of our faculties obliges us to conceive of the divine decree in parts, these parts were in the divine mind without separation and without priority ; and that, whether we ascend higher or lower in our statement of that part of the divine de- cree which we call the doctrine of predestination, that doctrine is inti- mately connected with a series of events, the beginning and the end of which our minds are incapable of following. Having thus unfolded that view of the divine foreknowledge upon which the doctrine of predestination rests in the Calvinistic system, I shall next explain some of the terms commonly used by those who hold this doctrine, that the true meaning of the Calvinists may be fully understood, before we proceed to compare their system with those formerly stated, or to examine the difficulties with which it is attended. For this purpose, I quote the following words of our Con- fession of Faith, chapter iii. " 3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore- ordained to everlasting death. ^j " 4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed ; and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished. " 5. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto hfe, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and im- mutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or per- OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 525 severance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions or causes moving him thereunto ; and all to the praise of his glorious grace. " 6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season ; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. " 7. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the un- searchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or with- holdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice." I quote also the seventeenth article of the Church of England, in the meaning and even in the expression of which, there is a striking agreement with part of the preceding paragraphs from the Confession of Faith. " Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and dam- nation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to ho- nour. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose, by his Spirit working in due season : they, through grace, obey the calling : they be justi- fied freely : they be made sons of God by adoption : they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ : they walk re- ligiously in good works ; and at lengtli, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity." These quotations suggest the following propositions, which may be considered as constituting the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, and in which there is an explication of most of the terms. 1. God chose out of the whole body of mankind, whom he viewed in his eternal decree as involved in guilt and misery, certain persons who are called the elect, whose names are known to him, and whose number, being unchangeably fixed by his decree, can neither be in- creased nor diminished ; so that the whole extent of the remedy offered in the gospel is conceived to have been determined beforehand by the divine decree. 2. As all the children of Adam were involved in the same guilt and misery, the persons thus chosen had nothing in themselves to render them more worthy of being elected than any others ; and therefore the decree of election is called in the Calvinistic system ab- solute, by which word is meant, that it arises entirely from the good pleasure of God, because all the circumstances which distinguish the elect from others are the fruit of their election. 3. For the persons thus chosen, God, from the beginning, appoint- ed the means of their being delivered from corruption and guilt ; and 526 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. by these means, effectually applied in due season, he conducts them at length to everlasting life, 4. Jesus Christ was ordained by God to be the Saviour of these / persons, and God gave them to him to be redeemed by his blood, to I be called by his Spirit, and finally to be glorified with him. All that = Christ did in the character of Mediator, was in consequence of this original appointment of the Father, which has received from many I divines the name of the Covenant of Redemption ; a phrase M'hich suggests the idea of a mutual stipulation between Christ and the Father, in which Christ undertook all that work which he executed in his human nature, and which he continues to execute in heaven, in order to save the elect ; and the Father promised that the persons for whom Christ died should be saved by his death. According to the tenor of this covenant of redemption, the merits of Christ are not considered as the cause of the decree of election, but as a part of that decree ; in other words, God was not moved by the mediation of Christ to choose certain persons out of the great body of mankind to be saved ; but having chosen them, he conveys all the means of sal- vation through the channel of this mediation. 5. From the election of certain persons, it necessarily follows that all the rest of the race of Adam are left in guilt and misery. The exercise of the divine sovereignty, in regard to those who are not elected, is called Reprobation ; and the condition of all having been originally the same, reprobation is called absolute in the same sense with election. In reprobation, there are two acts, which the Calvin- ists are careful to distinguish. The one is called Preterition, the passing by those who are not elected, and withholding from them those means of grace which are provided for the elect. The other is called Condemnation, the act of condemning those who have been passed by, for the sins which they commit. In the former act, God exercises his good pleasure, dispensing his benefits as he will : in the latter act, he appears as a Judge, inflicting upon men that sentence which their sins deserve. If he had bestowed upon them the same assistance which he prepared for others, they would have been pre- served from that sentence : but as their sins proceeded from their own corruption, they are thereby rendered worthy of punishment ; and the justice of the Supreme Ruler is manifested in condemning them, as his mercy is manifested in saving the elect. Section IV. I SHALL in this section advert to the points of difference in the three systems which have been mentioned, and to the difficulties in which the peculiarities of the two systems, that admit of being compared, are supposed to involve those by whom they are defended. The Socinian and Calvinistic systems are so diametrically opposite, that they do not admit of being compared. For the Socinian, with- drawing future contingent events from the foreknowledge of the Su- preme Being, either proceeds upon the principles of materialism, OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 527 according to which the actions of men are events of the same order, arising miavoidably by the same laws of nature, with the phenomena of the heavens and the earth ; or it exchides the possibility of an eternal decree respecting the future condition of men. The first of these alternatives is adopted by Dr. Priestley : the second was adopt- ed by Socinus and his followers. But neither the one nor the other presents what can appear, to those who hold the received principles of natural religion, a system of predestination. Accordingly Socinus says,* that all those places of Scripture, which treat of the divine decree of saving certain men, are to be so explained, Ut non certi qui- dam homines nominatim intelligaiihir, sed genus quoddani homi- num. And one of his followers, speaking in the name of the Socinians, says, that they reject, as hurtful to piety and contrary to Scripture, both the predestination and reprobation of individuals, and also the foreknowledge that some are to make a right use of their liberty, and others to abuse it; and that they assert nothing more than this, that God has predestinated to eternal life all whosoever shall, to the utmost of their power, continue to the end in obedience to his precepts, and that he has reprobated all whosoever shall not obey. Itaque electio ef reprobafio in genere prorsus est certa et immutabilis, i?i individuo autem mutahilis est.\ The Arminian system agrees with the Calvinistic in admitting that contingent events, such as the determinations and actions of men, are foreseen by God ; and this fundamental principle, without which there can be no predestination, being common to both, it is possible to compare the manner of its being applied in the two systems. Both agree in admitting that there is a peremptory decree by which the Su- preme Being, from all eternity, unalterably fixed the everlasting con- dition of man ; but the precise ditierence between them is this. The vVrminians hold that God made this peremptory decree upon the fore- sight of the faith and good works of some, of the infidelity and impe- nitence of others ; i. e. God, foreseeing from all eternity that some would repent and believe, elected them to everlasting life ; and fore- seeing that others would contiiuie in sin and unbelief, left them to perish. The Calvinists, on the other hand, say, that the foith and good works of the elect are the consequences of their election, and are foreseen by God, because he determined to produce them ; that, being the fruits of his determination, they cannot be regarded as the cause of it ; and therefore that the election of some, and the reprobation of others, are to be resolved into the good pleasure of God, acting indeed upon the wisest reasons, but not originally moved by the foresight of any circumstance in the former rendering them more worthy of being elected than the latter. The first thing to be attended to, in comparing these two systems, is the manner of that foresight upon which the Arminian system rests, and from which result all the points of difference between it and the Calvinistic. It is a foresight of the faith and good works of some, in consequence of which they are elected ; of the infidelity and impeni- tence of others, in consequence of which they are reprobated. But this is a foresight which the Arminians do not class either under * Socin. Prselcct. cap. 13. | Stapfer. iii. 415. 528 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. scientia simpUcis intclligenti9e,ox under sciejifia visionis : — not un- der the first, which is conversant about things possible, or those ab- stract relations which are independent of actual existence ; Avhereas this foresight is conversant about objects which are certainly to exist, and whose future existence, as foreseen by God, has power to pro- duce a decree : — not under the second, which is the knowledge of all things that God has determined to produce ; whereas this foresight is conceived to be antecedent to the determination of God, being the cause of his decree respecting the condition of those persons whose conduct is foreseen. To this kind of foresight, thus distinguished from scientia simpU- cis intelligentiae, and from scientia visionis, they gave the name of scientia media, considering it as in the middle between the two. The term was first invented by Molina, a Spanish Jesuit, and a pro- fessor of divinity in Portugal. It was the leading principle of a book which he published in 1588, entitled, "Liberi arbitrii concordia cum gratias donis, divina proescientia, providentia, predestinatione, et repro- .batione :" and it has been adopted by all who hold the system of Ar- ininius. Scientia media is the knowledge, neither of events that are barely possible, nor of events that are absolutely decreed by God, but of events that are to happen upon certain conditions. When it is ap- plied to the doctrine of predestination, there arises out of it the follow- ing system. God from eternity took into his view the natural dispo- sitions of men, the circumstances in which they were to be placed, and the objects which were to be presented to them. From this view, he foresaw the conduct which they were to pursue, and he made their conduct, thus foreseen, the measure according to which he determined to administer the means of grace, and to fix their everlasting happi- ness or misery. To state the matter more shortly : God foresees what the conduct of men will be in certain situations ; upon this foresight he determines their situations ; and thus by scientia media the free agency of man is reconciled with that prescience, which is implied in the conception of a perfect Mind, who rules the universe. The Calvinists do not admit that the kind of knowledge, called by this new name, is really diiferent from the two species formerly stated, under which it appears to them that all the objects which can be known are comprehended : and the reasoning which they employ is to this purpose. If it is meant by scientia media that God knows every supposable case ; that all the combinations which can arise in every situation were present to his mind ; and that he is as well acquainted with what might have happened in any given circum- stances as with what will happen; this is scientia simplicis intelli- gentise. If by scientia media, or, as it is sometimes called, condi- tionate foreknowledge, be meant that God sees what is to be, not singly, but as depending upon something going before it, this is scientia visionis. For nothing stands alone and unrelated in the uni- verse : every event arises out of something antecedent, and is fruitful of consequences. What is called hypothetical necessity, by which no more is meant than this, if one thing is, another shall be, pervades the whole system of creation, and is the very thing which constitutes a system. Events, therefore, are not to be considered as the less or- dained by God, because they are dependent upon conditions, since OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 529 the conditions are of his appointment, and the manner in which tlie event depends upon the conditions is known to him ; so that if the con- duct of men be considered as arising out of their circumstances, their temper, and the objects presented to them, it is as much a branch of the scientia visionu as the circumstances, the temper, and the objects out of which it arises. But if by scientia media we mean not merely the knowledge of all that is possible, not merely the knowledge of all future events in connexion with all present circumstances, but the knowledge of an event that is to be, although it did not enter into the decree of God, it follows, from the principles stated in the preceding section, that there can be no such knowledge. For, 1. every future «vent derives its futurition from the decree of God. To say, there- fore, that God sees an event before he has decreed that it shall be, is to say that he views as future, an event which is merely possible ; in other words, that he views an event not as it is. But, 2. could we suppose that some events were future, which God had not decreed, his knowledge of these events would be reduced to that kind of con- jecture which we form with regard to what shall be, from attending to all the previous circumstances out of which it may be conceived to arise, instead of being that clear, infallible, intuitive prescience of the whole series of causes and effects, which seems essential to the per- fection of the divine understanding. And still farther, 3. supposina- that, in some inconceivable manner, future events, not decreed by him, were as certainly foreknown as those which he had decreed, here would be a part of the universe withdrawn from the government of the Supreme Ruler ; something that is to come into existence inde- pendently of him, the futurition of which, being antecedent to his will, becomes the rule of his determination. Upon these principles the Calvinists, maintaining the sovereignty of the Deity, reject the third sense of scientia media, which is the only sense that is of any use in the Arminian system. They conceive it impossible that any thing, which is to be in the creation, can be the foundation of the divine decree concerning the creature, because every circumstance respecting the existence of the creature is depen- dent upon the divine will ; and they adhere to their own division of the divine knowledge as complete, because the things which may be, and the things which God hath willed to be, comprehend all the objects that can be known. There are several passages of Scripture which the Arminians adduce in proof of scientia media. Of this kind is the following. 1 Sam. xxiii. 10 — 13. " David said, 0 Lord God of Israel,, thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seeketh to come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hands ? Will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard ? And the Lord said, He will come down: they will deliver thee up. Then David arose and departed out of Keilah : and it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah, and he foreborc to go forth." Saul's coming down, and the people's delivering up David, depended upon the condition of David's remaining in the city. As the condition did not take place, the event did not happen : and therefore here, it is said, is an instance of an event not decreed by God, for then it must have happened, yet foretold by him ; in other words, here, it is said, 47 4 A 530 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. is an instance of scientia media, the foreknowledge of an event depending upon a condition. But the Calvinists consider this as an instance of scientia simplicis intelligentise. Amidst the possible com- binations of objects which are present to the divine mind, this was one, that if David remained in Keilah, Saul would come down, and the people of the city would deliver him up. The connexion between his remaining, Saul's coming down, and the conduct of the people, was what God saw ; and at the request of David he declared that connexion. But we must entertain as low an opinion of the divine foreknowledge as the Socinians do, if we suppose that he foresaw the actual existence of any of the events thus connected. To the scientia simplicis iyiielligentiae there appeared a chain, of which David's re- maining in Keilah was one link : to the scientia visio?iis there appeared another chain, of which it was not a link. God knew what would have happened in the one case ; he knew what was to happen in the other: but it is a sophism to say that he foresaw what would have happened, when he knew it was not to happen ; and this sophism is at the bottom of all the reasonings adduced to prove that there is in God the certain foreknowledge of any events but those which he has decreed to be. In the same manner the Calvinists explain that expression of our Lord, Mat. xi. 21, which appears to be a still clearer instance of scientia media. " Woe unto thee, Chorazin, woe unto thee, Beth- saidah ; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sack- cloth and ashes." Here is a declaration, consequently a knowledge, of the event which would have happened, had the constitution of the universe admitted of the works of our Lord being done in Tyre and Sidon. This event was possible, before the Creator adopted that con- stitution of the universe which now is : it would have taken place had a particular constitution been adopted ; but its existence being excluded by the decree which, adopting the present constitution, includes the objects about which scientia visionis is conversant, it remains amongst the objects of scientia simplicis intelligentise. So all the promises of happiness which men shall realize if they prove obedient, all the expressions of regret at their missing the happiness which they might have attained if they had been obedient, and all the threatenings of misery which they shall incur if they disobey, — all conditional propositions of this kind, with which the Scriptures abound, are to be considered not as intimations of the knowledge which God lias of the futurition of any of these events, but merely as enunciations of one branch of that hypothetical necessity which pervades the sys- tem of the universe — the branch by which happiness is connected with virtue, and misery with vice. Such is the different manner in which the Arminians and the Cal- vinists conceive of the foreknowledge of God. The Arminians, admitting that all events, of whatever kind, are foreknown by the Supreme Being, but desirous to exempt the actions of men from the influence of his decree, have adopted the term scientia media, in order to express a species of knowledge in the divine mind difierent from scientia simplicis intelligentise, and from scientia visionis. But to the Calvinists, this new term, invented by Molina, appears to OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 531 be an attempt to establish a distinction where there is not a differ- ence : for according to tliem, every thing that is to exist is decreed by God ; it derives its futurition from his decree, and it is foreseen be- cause it is decreed. This ditlerence in the manner of conceiving of the divine fore- knowledge is the foundation of the difference between the Arminian and the Calvinistic systems, all the distinguishing features of which are instantly perceived, when the different conceptions of the divine foreknowledge, that have been explained, are applied to the great subject about which the systems are conversant. The plan of the Arminian system is this. God, having decreed to give his Son to be the Saviour of all men, having determined to save by Jesus Christ them that repent and believe, and having fixed a certain administra- tion of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to salvation, foresaw what persons would, under this administration, repent and believe, and them he elected to everlasting life. The plan of the Calvinistic system is this. God having, from all eternity, chosen a certain number of persons, did, hi time, give his Son to be their Sa- viour ; he bestows upon them, through him, that grace which eftect- ually determines them to repent and believe, and so eftectually conducts them, by faith and good works, to everlasting life. In the Arminian system, the faith and good works of some persons are viewed as in- dependent of the decree by which they are elected. In the Calvinistic system, they are considered as the fruit of election ; and they were, from eternity, known to God, because they were, in time, to be pro- duced by the execution of his decree. In the Arminian system, it is conceived that, although there are many who do not repent and be- lieve, yet means sufficient to bring men to salvation are administered to all ; from which it follows, that, antecedently to the decree of elec- tion, these elected persons must have been considered as distinguished from others, by some predisposition in respect to faith and good works ; so that the doctrine of original sin can be admitted into this system only under such limitations as render it consistent with such predisposition. In the Calvinistic system, predestination being an appointment to the means as well as to the end, and all the condi- tions of salvation being given with Christ, by the decree of election, to those who are elected, every conception of any original superiority, or any ground of boasting, by nature, is excluded ; and the doctrine of original sin is admitted to the extent of representing all men as involved in the same guilt and misery, as equally unable to extricate themselves, and as discriminated from one another by the mere good pleasure of God. In the Arminian system, Christ being conceived as given by God to be the Saviour of all the children of Adam, and as having purchased for all men a sufficient administration of the means of grace, what is called impef ratio sahitis maybe of much wider extent than what is called appUcatio sahitis. God wills all men to be saved, upon condition that they repent and believe ; but the fulfil- ment of the condition is conceived, in this system, to depend upon man ; and, therefore, the purpose which, in the eternal counsel of divine love, extended to all, is attained with regard to many, or to few, according to the use which they make of the means of grace afforded them. In the Calvinistic system, what is called appUcatio 532 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. saluHs is conceived to be of equal extent with impetratio salutis. To all those whom God from the beginning decreed to save, he affords the means which infallibly conduct them to salvation : it is not in the power of man to increase or diminish their number ; and the divine purpose is effectual to the very extent to which it was originally formed. This view of the points of difference between the Arminian and Calvinistic systems, suggests the principal difficulties that are peculiar to each, which I shall in this place barely mention. The difficulties under which the Arminian system labours, are three. 1 . It is not easy to reconcile the infinite diversity of situations, and the very unfavourable circumstances in which many nations, and some individuals of all nations are placed, with one fundamental po- sition of the Arminian system, that to all men there are administered means sufficient to bring them to salvation. 2. It is not easy to reconcile those views of the degeneracy of human nature, and those lessons of humility and self-abasement in the sight of God which both Scripture and reason inculcate, with another fun- damental position of that system, that the faith and good works of those who are elected, did not flow from their election, but were fore- seen by God as the grounds of it. 3. It is not easy to reconcile the immutability and efficacy of the divine counsel, which enter into our conceptions of the First Cause, with a purpose to save all, suspended upon a condition which is not fulfilled with regard to many. The difficulties attending the Calvinistic system, however much they may have the appearance of being multiplied by a variety of expressions, are reducible to two. 1. It appears to be inconsistent with the nature of man, to destroy his liberty, and to supersede his exertions, that they who are elected should be eftectually determined to repent and believe. 2. It appears inconsistent with the goodness and justice of God, that when all were involved in the same guilt and misery, he should ordain the effectual means of being delivered out of that condition only to a part of the human race, leaving the rest infallibly to perish. And if this be a true account of the divine dispensation, it seems to be a necessary consequence, that all the moral evil which is in the world, and all the misery arising from that moral evil, either here or hereafter, are to be ascribed to God. I have mentioned the difficulties peculiar to the two systems in this place, because they are suggested by the general view already given of the points of difference between them. But, in order to discern the force of the difficulties, and to judge of the attempts that have been made to remove them, it is necessary to attend more particu- larly to the account that is given, in each system, of the application of the remedy. I shall proceed, therefore, now to this third subject of discussion, respecting the gospel remedy ; and, from the complete view which we shall thus attain, of the characteristical features of the two systems, we shall be qualified to estimate the difficulties that adhere to each, and prepared to weigh the amount of the evidence which each professes to derive from Scripture. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. 533 CHAPTER VIII. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY, As it is nnquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, that none partake of the salvation which the Gospel was given to afford, but those who repent and believe, we are entitled to say that the remedy offered in tlie Gospel is connected with a certain character of mind. The extent of the remedy being thus limited in so far that it reaches only to per- sons of that character, I employ the phrase. The Application of the Remedy, in order to express the production of that character ; and I consider systems as differing from one another in respect of the appli- cation of the remedy, when they differ as to the manner in whicli the character is produced. From the distinguishing features of the Socinian system, it will bo perceived that, as it denies several of those fundamental principles on which the Arminians and Calvinists agree, it cannot be compared with them in respect to the application of the remedy. The Sociuians adopt that doctrine which was introduced by Pelagius about the be- ginning of the fifth century, that the moral powers of human nature are not in the least injured by the sin of our first parents, but that all the children of Adam are as able to yield a perfect obedience to the commands of God as he was at his creation. They admit that men may be led, by the strength of passion, by unfavourable circumstances, and by imitation, into such sins as separate them from the favour of God, and render it difficult for them to return to the obedience of his laws ; but they hold that this difficulty never amounts to a moral im- possibility ; and that at what time soever a sinner forsakes his trans- gressions, he is forgiven, not upon account of what Christ did, but from the essential goodness of the divine nature. They acknowledge that the Gospel gives to a sinful world more gracious and more effectual assistance in returning to their duty, than ever was afforded before ; but they consider this assistance as arising solely from the clear revelation there given of the nature and the will of God, from the example there proposed, and from the hope of eternal life, that gift of God which is peculiar to this religion. By its doctrines and its promises, it presents to the human mind the strongest motives to obedience. All, therefore, who live in a Christian country, enjoy an outward assistance in the discharge of their duty, of very great value ; and those who receive the Gospel as the word of God, feel the power of it in their hearts. This inward power, the influence of the doctrine of Christ upon the mind, the Socinians understand to be, in many places of the New Testament, the whole import of these expressions, 47* 534 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE "the Spirit of God," the "Spirit of Hfe," the "Spirit of the Lord." For as they deny that the Spirit is a person distinct from the Father and the Son, they are obhged to consider all the expressions from which the Trinitarians infer the personality of the Spirit, as figures, or circumlocutions ; and when it is said, " we walk after the Spirit — the Spirit of life makes us free — where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty — ye are washed and sanctified by the Spirit of our God," they find it easy to evade the argument which these and numberless phrases of the same kind are supposed to contain, by understanding the meaning of the sacred writers to be no more than this, that the influ- ence of the doctrine and promises of the Gospel upon the mind, when they are firmly believed and cordially embraced, produces such eflects. From these fundamental principles of the Socinian system it follows, that the application of the remedy is conceived in that system to be purely the work of man ; that, as even without the advantages which the Gospel aflTords, he may, in every situation, by the mere use of his natural powers, do what is of itself sufficient to deliver him from the evils of sin, so his improving the assistance communicated by the Christian revelation, in such a manner as to attain the character con- nected with the enjoyment of its blessings, arises not in any degree from the agency of a superior being upon his mind, but is an exer- cise of his own power depending wholly upon himself.* It is one of those future contingencies which the Socinians suppose to be with- drawn from the divine foresight ; and predestination according to them is nothing more than the purpose of calling both Jews and Gen- tiles to the knowledge of the truth, and the hope of eternal life by Jesus Christ — a purpose which God from the beginning formed, with- out knowing whether the execution of this purpose would have the eftect of bringing any individual to heaven. Neither the extent nor the application of the remedy entered into his decree ; but God did all that he proposed to do by giving the revelation, leaving to men to make use of it as they thought fit, and to receive such reward and such punishment as they shall appear to him to deserve. This system, which as I said before attempts to get rid of difficul- ties by degrading the character of the Supreme Being, and excluding some of the first principles of religion, does not fall within a compa- rative view of the difterent systems of predestination ; and there re- main to be considered only two opinions concerning what I call the application of the remedy, which we distinguish by tlie names of Ar- minian and Calvin istic. Of each of these opinions I shall give a fair statement ; by which I mean, that I shall endeavour to show in what manner the Arminian opinion is separated from Socinian principles by those who hold it, and in what light the Calvinistic opinion is re- presented by those who appear to understand best the grounds upon which it may be defended ; and from this fair statement I shall pro- ceed to canvass the difficulties, formerly mentioned, which adliere to these two systems of predestination. The Arminians and Calvinists differ as to the measure of that injury which the moral powers of human nature received from the trans- * A Deo habemus quod homines sumus, a nobis ipsis quod justi. — Pelagius. APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. 535 gression of our first parents : but they agree in acknowledging that man has fallen from his original rectitude ; that there is an universal corruption of the whole race, the influence of which extends to the understanding, the will, and the affections ; that in this state no man is of himself capable of giving any uniform and eflectual resistance to temptation, of extricating himself from the dominion of sin, or of attaining, by the exercise of his own powers, the character which is connected with a full participation of the blessings of the Gospel. They agree that the Father of spirits can act upon the minds of men so as to administer a remedy to this corruption, and to recover them to the practice of virtue ; and they think it probable, even from the light of nature, that he will exert his divine power, and employ that various access which his continual presence with his creatures gives him, in accomplishing this gracious purpose. They find the hope of this expressed, as a dictate of reason, in many passages of heathen writers ; they find it inspiring all the prayers for divine assistance which occur both in the Old and in the New Testament ; and they find it confirmed by many promises, which good men under the dis- pensation of the law embraced, but the complete fulfilment of which was looked for as one of the peculiar characters of that better dispen- sation which the law announced. When they read these words of Jeremiah, quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews, x. 16, 17, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them : and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more," — they conceive the prophet and the apostle to have understood, that with the pardon of sin — that blessing which was typified by the sac- rifices of the law, but is truly obtained by the sacrifice of the cross, — there is conjoined under the Gospel an influence exerted by the Al- mighty upon the hearts and the minds of Christians ; and that these two taken together make up the character and the excellency of that better covenant which came in place of the first. The Arminians and Calvinists agree farther, that the Holy Ghost is a person distinct from the Father and the Son ; that he is a divine person ; and that he bears a part in accomplishing the salvation of mankind ; that he in- spired the prophets, who from the beginning of the world spake of this salvation, and cherished the expectation of it in the breasts of pious men ; that having been given without measure to the man Christ Jesus, he descended, in fulfilment of his promise at the day of Pentecost, upon his apostles, and endowed them with' those extraor- dinary powers which were necessary for the successful publication of the Gospel ; that he continues to be the fountain of all spiritual in- fluence— the distributor of those gifts to men which Jesus Christ re- ceived ; and that the Father in all ages, upon account of the interces- sion of the Son, gives the Holy Spirit to his children. The Arminians and the Calvinists agree, that by the distribution of these gifts, the Holy Ghost exercises the oflice of the Sanctifier and Comforter of Christians ; that he opens their understandings ; that he renews them in the spirit of their minds ; that he inclines their hearts to obey the truth ; that he helps their infirmities ; that all the graces in whidi they abound are the fruits of the Spirit ; and that as many as are the children of God are led by the Spirit of God. They agree farther in 536 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE expressing these influences of the Spirit by the word Grace. The Socinians contend that this use of the word is not warranted by Scrip- ture ; that the word in general signifies favour ; that it is apphed in a variety of meanings ; but that as there is no unequivocal instance of the sacred writers employing this word to express an influence ex- erted by God upon the mind, all that is said in the systems of theology about grace is founded upon a perversion of Scripture. To the Ar- minians and Calvinists, on the other hand, it appears that there are passages in the New Testament, where the sense requires that the word be understood with the meaning which they affix to it. Of this kind are Heb. iv. 16, 1 Cor. xv. 10. The controversy about the Scripture meaning of the word grace is not of much importance. Although in this, as in many other instances, the Scriptures may have been quoted and applied more from a regard to the sound than to the sense, and although the word grace may have been often understood to mean an influence upon the mind, when the sacred writers were speaking of the favour of God in general, or of the dispensation of the Gospel, which, being the brightest display of his favour to man, is often called the Grace of God, yet this does not aftbrd any kind of argument against the reality of what is termed in theological lan- guage, grace, or even against the propriety of that use of the word. For it matters little what words are employed upon any subject, pro- vided the sense affixed to them be clearly defined ; and if there is various evidence in Scripture, as the Arminians and Calvinists agree in believing, that the Spirit of God does act immediately upon the mind of man, there is no word by which an influence so fraught with blessings can be more fitly marked than by the general word a;ac's» grace ; even although the passages, where the sacred writers have applied the word in that sense, were more equivocal than they really are. With all these points of agreement, the difference between the Ar- minian and Calvinistic systems, as to the application of the remedy, is most material, because it respects the nature and the efficacy of that influence upon the mind, which in both systems is called by the name of grace. The Arminians, who believe that the death of Christ was an atonement for the sins of the whole world, which by redeem- ing all men from the curse put them into a situation in which they may be saved, believe, in conformity to this fundamental principle, that the death of Christ also purchased for all men means sufficient to bring them to salvation. And therefore, as they acknowledge that the corruption of human nature opposes obstacles to faith and re- pentance, which our natural powers are unable of themselves to sur- mount, they believe that the grace purchased by Christ restores all men to a situation, in which they may do those works which are well pleasing to God. This grace is called common, because it is given indifferently to all ; preventing, because it comes before our own en- deavours ; exciting, because it stirs up our powers, naturally sluggish and averse from God. Of some measure of this grace, no man in any situation is supposed to be destitute. It accompanies the light of nature in heathen countries, as well as the preaching of the gospel hi those which are Christian ; and every one who improves the mea- sure given him is thereby prepared for more. From the smaUest APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. 537 degrees of this grace, and the most unfavourable circumstances in which it can be given, those Avho are not wanting to themselves are certainly conducted to such degrees as produce faith and repentance ; and all, whose minds have been regenerated by this exciting grace, receive what the Armhiians call subsequent and co-operating grace ; — subsequent, because it follows after conversion ; — co-operating, be- cause it concurs with human exertions in producing those moral virtues, which, having originated in that grace which is preventing, and being carried on to perfection by that which is subsequent, are fitly called the fruits of the Spirit. As higher degrees of grace are supposed to be given in consequence of the improvement of those which were previous, the Arminians consider the efficacy of all grace as depending upon the reception which it meets with. They cannot say that it is of the nature of grace to be effectual ; for although, according to their system, it be given to all with such impartiality, that he who believes had not originally a larger portion of grace than he who does not believe, yet there are many in whom it does not produce faith and repentance. It is purely, therefore, from the event that grace is to be distinguished as effectual or ineffectual ; and the same grace being given to all, there is no other cause to which the difference in the event can be ascribed, than the difference in the character of those by whom it is received. As the event of the grace of God is conceived to depend upon men, it follows, according to this system, that the grace of God may be re- sisted, i. e. the obstacles opposed by the perverseness of the human will may be such as finally to prevent the eftect of this grace. Ac- cordingly, the Arminians find themselves obliged to give such an account of the nature of grace as admits of its being resistible. It was thus described by the first Arminians : — " Lenis suasio ; nobilis- simus agendi modus in conversione hominum, qua3 fiat suasionibus, morali ratione consensum voluntatis producens." The English phrase answering to this description is Moral Suasion ; and the meaning of the phrase is thus explained by the best Arminian writers. They conceive that all that impossibility of keeping the commandments of God, which arises from the corruption of human nature, is removed by the grace of God ; and that, while the word of God proposes ex- hortations, warnings, and inducements, to man thus restored to the capacity of doing what is required of him, the Spirit of God opens his understanding to discern the force of these things, and is continu- ally present with him, suggesting good thoughts, inspiring good de- sires, and by the most seasonable, friendly, and gentle counsel, inclining his mind to his duty. This seasonable, friendly, and gentle counsel is called moral suasion ; but this counsel may be rejected ; for herein, say the Arminians, consists the liberty of man, that with every possible reason before him to choose one course he may choose an- other, and the influence of any other being cannot be of such a kind as certainly and effectually to determine his choice, without destroy- ing his nature. After all the assistance and direction, therefore, which he can derive from the grace of God, he may believe or he may not believe ; he may return to the habitual practice of sin after he has been converted ; and, by abusing those means of grace which he had formerly improved, he may in the end fail of attaining salvation. 4B 538 ■ OPINIONS CONCERNING THE The account, which I have now given of the Arminian doctrine with regard to the nature and efficacy of the grace of God, is agree- able to the three last of the five articles in which the early Arminians stated their system. In these articles they discover an anxiety to vindicate themselves from the charge of Pelagianism, or from the appearance of ascribing so much to the natural powers of man, as to render the grace of God unnecessary. 3. Man has not saving faith from himself, and, being in a state of depravity and sin, he cannot, by the exercise of his own free will, think or do any thing that is truly good ; but it is necessary that he be regenerated and renewed by God in Christ through his Holy Spirit, in his mind, his aftections, or his will, and all liis faculties, that he may understand, think, will, and perform any good thing ; accord- ing to that saying of Christ, " Without me ye can do nothing." 4. The fourth article, after saying that this grace of God is the be- ginning, the progress, and the perfection of all good, so that all our good works are to be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ, adds these words : Bnt as to the manner of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible : for it is said in Scripture of many, that they resist- ed the Holy Spirit. 5. The fifth article, after mentioning the strength and assistance furnished to those who are united to Christ by a true faith, expresses a doabt whether they may not by their own negligence make ship- wreck of a good conscience, and forfeit their interest in Christ. The later Arminians laid aside the language of doubt upon this subject, and said without hesitation, that those who, being united to Christ by faith, had been partakers of his grace, might, through their own fault, fall from a state of grace. The Calvinistic system gives a very different view of the applica- tion of the remedy ; and the difference may be traced back to its fundamental principle, that Christ did not die for all men, but for those of every nation who are in the end to be saved. Them only he delivers from the curse, and for them only he purchases those in- fluences of the Spirit by which faith and repentance are produced. Others enjoy in common with them the gifts of nature, the bounties of providence, the light of conscience ; and all who live in a Christian country, by the motives proposed in the Gospel, and by the ordinances of religion may be restrained from many open sins, and excited to many good actions. But that grace, which forms in the mind of man the character connected with salvation, is confined to those whom God hath chosen. Being conferred in execution of an unchangeable decree, it cannot fail of attaining its eflect ; and, being the action of the Creator upon the mind of the creature, it is able to surmount all that opposition and resistance which arises from the corruption of human nature. It is distinguished by the Calvinists from that con- tinual influence which the Supreme Cause exerts throughout his cre- ation, and by which he upholds his creatures in being, preserves the faculties which he gave them, and may in some sense, be said to con- cur with all their actions. And it is conceived to be an extraordinary supernatural influence of the Creator, by Avhich the disorders which sin had introduced into the faculties of human nature are corrected, and the mind is transformed and renewed, and created again unto APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. 539 good works. There have not been wanting some who have attempted to explahi the manner of this supernatural intlucnce. But the wiser Calvinists, without entangling themselves in an inextricable labyrinth of expressions which after every attempt to affix clear ideas to them must remain unintelligible, rest in that caution which our Lord gave when he spoke to Nicodemus upon this subject. John iii. 7, 8. '• INIarvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Although we cannot give a satisfying account of the causes why the wind blows at a particular season from one quarter, or why it ceases just when it does, we do not doubt of the fact, because we see and feel its effects. So, although the manner of the operation of the Spirit is not an object of sense, and cannot be explained by words, we may be assured of the reality of the operation from its effects. When we see such a change upon the disposition and the life of the regenerate, as cannot be accounted for by any natm-al means, we are led to acknowledge the power of the Divine Agent by whom the change was produced ; and we perceive the propriety with which the Scriptures, in speaking of this change, make use of such expressions as being born again, creation, resurrec- tion. For the figure used in these expressions tends to mislead, unless the action marked by them implies an exertion of power, the effect of which is independent of any co-operation or any resistance in the subject of the action ; and therefore they may be considered as indi- cating such an operation of the Spirit, as effectually removes that corruption of the powers of human nature which nothing less can remedy. This supernatural influence is seldom exerted without the use of means ; in other words, although the means of removing the corrup- tion of human nature derive their efficacy entirely from the Spirit of God, yet, in accomplishing this object, the Spirit of God ordinarily employs the exhortations, the promises and the threatenings of the word of God, the council and example of good men, and all those instruments which have a tendency to improve the human mind. Hence that change which is the work of the Spirit, is not instantane- ous, but consists of many previous steps, of many preparatory dispo- sitions and affections, and of a gradual progress in goodness ; — by all which a man is conducted from that state of degeneracy which is natural to the posterity of Adam, to the possession of that character without which none can be saved. His understanding is enlightened with the knowledge of the truth ; his will is inclined to follow the dictates of his understanding ; he pursues a certain line of conduct, because it is his choice ; and he has the feeling of the most perfect liberty, because he becomes willing to do that from which formerly he was averse. Augustine expressed the effect of this influence by the significant phrase, victrix delectatio ; a delight in the command- ments of God, which overcomes every inferior appetite ; and all the Calvinists, when they speak of the efficacy of divine grace, would be understood to mean that the grace of God acts upon man, not as a machine, but as a reasonable being. As the grace of God, which is conceived to derive its efficacy from 540 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE his power of fulfilling his purpose in those for whom it is destined, overcomes all the opposition with which it is at first received, so it continues to be exerted amidst all the frailty and corruption which adhere to human nature in a present state. It is not exerted to such a degree as to preserve any man from every kind of sin. For God is pleased to teach Christians humility, by keeping up the remem- brance of that state out of which they were delivered, and to quicken their aspirations after higher degrees of goodness, by leaving them to struggle with temptation, and to feel manifold infirmities. But although no man is enabled in this life to attain to perfection, the grace of God preserves those to whom it is given, from drawing back to perdition. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints flows necessarily from that decree, by which they were from eternity chosen to salvation, and from the manner in which according to the Calvin- istic system the decree was executed ; and all the principles of the system must be renounced before we can believe that any of those for whom Christ died, and who consequently became partakers of his grace, can fall from that grace either finally — by which is meant that they shall not in the end be saved, — or totally, by which is meant that they shall at any period of their lives commit sins so heinous and so presumptuous, and persist in them so obstinately, as at that period to forfeit entirely the divine favour. All the parts of that delineation which I have now given, are found in Chapters IX. X. XVII. of the Confession of Faith. The whole doctrine is not expressed in the tenth Article of the Church of England r but we consider it to be implied in the seventeenth. ■ ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED. 541 CHAPTER IX. ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED. After the view which I have given of the two great systems of opinion concerning the extent and the appUcation of that remedy which the gospel brings, we are prepared to estimate tlie difficulties that adhere to them. As every system, which, with our limited information, we can hold upon subjects so extensive and so magnifi- cent, must be attended with difficulties, it is not incumbent upon us to answer all the questions which our system may suggest ; and we have given a sufficient answer to many of them, when we show that the same questions, or others not more easily solved, are suggested by the opposite system. But as difficulties are of real weight when they imply a contradiction to some received truth, we are called to defend the system of opinion which we hold, by showing that it is not subversive of the nature of man or inconsistent with the nature of God. Section I. The Arminian system appears upon a general view, most satisfy- ing to a pious and benevolent mind. Pardon procured by the death of Christ for all that repent and believe, when conjoined with an administration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance, forms a remedy suited to the extent of the disease ; a remedy from which none are excluded by any circumstance foreign to themselves, and which, if it does not in the end deliver all from the evils of sin, fails, not through any defect in its own nature or any partiality in the Being from whom it proceeded, but purely through the obstinacy and perverseness of those to whom it is offered. But while this account of the gospel appears to derive, from its correspondence with our notions of the goodness and justice of God, the strongest internal recommendation, it is found to labour under these three difficulties. 1. The supposition of an administration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance, upon which this system proceeds, appears to be contradicted by fact. 2. This system, while in words it ascribes all to the grace of God, does in etfect resolve our salvation into something independent of that grace. 3. This system seems to imply a failure in the purposes of the 48 542 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC Almighty, which is not easily reconciled with oiir notions of his sovereignty. 1. It does not appear agreeable to fact, that there is an administra- tion of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance. For although there is nothing in the nature of the gospel to prevent it from becoming an universal religion, yet the fact is that by much the greatest part of the world does not enjoy the benefit of its instructions.* And although the imperfect propagation of the g9spel may be owing to the corruption and indifference of Christians, yet with regard to the inhabitants of those nations to whom the most distant intimation of its existence never extended, it cannot surely be said that there has been any want of inquiry on their part. The Arminians are obliged to resolve this manifest inequality in dispensing the advantages for attaining faith and repentance into the sovereignty of God, who imparts his free gifts to whom he will. Still however they do not abandon their principle ; for they contend that the grace of God accompanies the light of nature, and that all who improve this universal revelation are conducted by that grace to higher degrees of knowledge. But here also the fact does not appear to accord with their system. For the light of nature, although universal, is most unequal. In many countries superstition is rendered so inveterate by education, custom, and example, and the state of society is so unfavourable to the improvement of the mind, that none of the inhabitants has the means of extricating himself from error ; and even in those more enlightened parts of the world, where, by the cultivation of the powers of reason or the advantages of foreign instruction, men have risen to more honourable conceptions of the Deity, there does not appear any possibility of their attaining to the faith of Christ. For, as the apostle speaks, Rom. x. 17, "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall they hear without a preacher ?" The Socinians, indeed, say, that all in every situation who act up to the light afforded them, may be saved, without regard being had to the merits of Christ. But this opinion the Arminians strongly disclaim, and choose rather to say, that those who improve the measure of knowledge derived from the works of nature, and the grace of God which accompanies it, are, in some extraordinary manner, made acquainted with the doctrine of Christ, so as to attain before they die that faith in him which the means afforded them could not produce. And thus the Arminians are obliged, with regard to the greatest part of mankind, to give up their fundamental position, that sufficient means of grace are administered to all, and to have recourse to the production of faith by an immediate impression of the Spirit of God upon the mind. The Arminians, feeling the force of this difficulty, leave — piously and wisely leave — the fate of that great part of mankind who do not enjoy the gospel to the mercy of God in Christ ; and, in their confessions of faith, they confine their doctrine concerning the universal application of the remedy, to those who are called by the word. To this call they give the name of an election to grace and to the means of salvation, which they distinguish * Book I. Ch. ix. 4. I STSTElVrS COMPARED. 543 from an election to glory. Election to glory is the destination of eternal happiness to those who persevere in faith and good works. Election to grace is understood to be common to all who live in a Christian country, and to imply the giving to every one, by the preaching of the word and the power of the Spirit accompanying it, that grace which is sufficient to produce faith and to promote repent- ance unto life. But even after the Arminians have thus corrected and limited their doctrine with regard to the sufficiency of the means of grace, there remain two objections to it in point of fact. The first arises from the very unequal circumstances in which the inhabitants of different Christian countries are placed. In some countries the Scriptures are given to the people, that they may search them ; in others, they are withheld. In some countries the gospel is exhibited in a corrupt form, which tends to degrade the understanding and pervert the moral , conduct ; in others, it is presented in its native simplicity, as cherish- ing every exalted affection and forming the mind to virtue. In the same countries there are infinite diversities amongst individuals as to their intellectual powers, the measure of their information, their employments, their pursuits, their education, their society, the induce- ments to act properly, or the temptations to sin which arise from their manner of life. All these circumstances, having an effect upon the moral character, must be regarded in the Arminian system as a branch of the administration of the means of grace, because they are instruments which the Spirit of God may employ in that moral influence which he is considered as exerting over the mhid of man. By means of these circumstances, some are placed in a more favour- able situation for attaining faith than others; the same moral suasion, by which some are preserved from almost any approach to iniquity, becomes insufficient to restrain others from gross transgression ; and the Sovereign of the universe, who has ordained all these circum- stances, thus appears to discriminate, in respect of the means of salva- tion, those very persons who in this system are said to be equally elected to grace. It may be said, indeed, that the secret operation of divine grace counterbalances the diversity of outward circumstances ; so that, taking the internal assistance and the external means together, all who live in a Christian country are upon a footing. This is the method of answering the objection adopted by Grotius, and other able defenders of Arminianism. But it is a departure from the principles of that system ; for it is substituting, in place of an administration of the means of grace sufficient for all, an administration, in many instances defective ; and, in place of an internal grace common and equal to all, a grace imparted differently to different persons, accord- ing to circumstances. The second objection, in point of fact, to the supposition that in every Christian country there is such an administration of the means of grace as is sufficient to bring all men to faith, arises from this undeniable truth, that, amongst those to whom the gospel is preached, and in whose circumstances there is not that kind of diversity which can account for the difference, some believe and some do not believe. Some, with all the outward advantages which the publication of the gospel affords, continue the servants of sin ; whilst others attain, by 544 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC the same advantages, that measure of perfection which is consistent with the present slate of humanity. From this fact the Calvinists infer the reaUty of an inward discriminating grace, which appears to them the only satisfying account of the different fruits that proceed from the same external advantages, and which, although it is not, like the diversity of outward circumstances, an object of sense, may be certainly known by its effects. But the Arminians, instead of admit- ting this inference, readily answer the objection which seems to arise from this fact, by saying, that the grace which is sufficient to all, proves ineffectual with regard to many, because it is opposed. It is their own fault — the voluntary resistance which they might not have made, that prevents the grace of God from producing in them the effect which it was intended to produce in all, and which it actually does produce in others. To those who repent and believe the same sufficient grace is imparted ; by them also it might be resisted ; but because they do not resist, it proves effectual. Now, this is an answer to the objection ; that is, it gives a reason why that grace, which the Arminians say is sufficient to all who hear the gospel, proves ineffec- tual with regard to many. But it remains to be inquired, whether the reason is such as ought to enter into a theological system, or Avhether the admitting of this reason is not pregnant with objections no less formidable to their system, than the fact which it was brought to explain. For, 2. The second difficulty under which the Arminian system labours is this, that, while in words it ascribes all to the grace of God, it does in effect resolve our salvation into something independent of that grace. It was the principle of the Pelagians that the grace of God respects only the remission of sins, and that it is not given in adjutoreuvi, ne in posterum peccata commit tantur. Another of their aphorisms was, ad scientiam nos habere gratiam Christi, non ad charitatem. Arminius and his followers were most anxious to guard their system from the appearance of approaching to these principles. They ac- knowledged that man in his present state is not able to think or to do any thing truly good of himself ; that he must be renewed in all his faculties by the Spirit of God ; and that all our good works are to be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. They renounce, by the terms in which the articles of their faith are expressed, even that modifica- tion of the Pelagian principles which was introduced soon after they were first published, and which is known by the name of Semi-Pela- gianism. It was held by the Semi-Pelagians, that, although man is unable to bring any good work to perfection, yet the first motions towards a good life, sorrow for sin, desire of pardon, purposes of obedience, and the first acts of faith in Christ, are the natural exer- cise of human powers, proceeding from the constitution and circum- stances of man, without any supernatural grace ; that to all in whom God observes these preparatory dispositions he gives, for the sake of Christ, his Holy Spirit ; and that, by the influence of this Spirit con- tinually assisting their powers, they are enabled to make progress, and to persevere in the life of faith and obedience which they had begun. But the Arminians wish to discriminate themselves from the Semi-Pelagians, by mentioning, in their confessions of faith, a pre- SYSTEMS COMPARED. 545 venting gr^ce, gjvttia prseveniens seu prxcedanea ; which comes be- fore, not only our works, but our purposes and desires of doing good ; — ^by saying that tlie grace of God is the beginning as well as the progress and perfection of all good ; — and by acknowledging that, without this grace, man cannot understand, or think, or will any thing that is good. All those Avords, however, which they multiply in speaking of the grace of God, are accompanied with a clause which very much enervates their significancy. For the conclusion of the fourth article runs thus : " With regard to the manner of the operation of that grace, it is not irresistible; for it is said, in the seventh chapter of the book of Acts, and in many other places of Scripture, that they resisted the Holy Spirit." And, in place of the doubt expressed in the fifth article, whether those who have been united to Christ by true faith may not, by their own negligence, fall from grace, the Arminians, in the subsequent confessions of their faith, speak without hesitation of Christians who fall, through their own fault, from the faith which had been produced in them by the Spirit of God, and with regard to whom all the actions of the Spirit of God cease, because they do not fulfil the conditions required on their part. It is to be observed, that by the grace which may be re- sisted, the Arminians do not mean merely that grace Avhich calls men to the knowledge of the gospel, and furnishes them with the outward means of salvation, but that influence exerted by the Spirit of God upon the mind, which they are accustomed to describe by a multi- tude of words ; and what they mean by calling this grace irresistible, is not merely that opposition is made to it ; for those who hold the corruption of human nature in the highest degree, are the most ready to admit this opposition. It is matter of experience ; and none can deny that it is often mentioned in Scripture. But the Arminians, by calling the grace of God resistible, mean that it may be defeated ; in other words, that the resistance, given by a person whom the Spirit of God calls to faith and obedience, may be such as to render him unfit for believing and for obeying the divine will ; so that he either remains unconverted after all the operations of grace upon his soul, or he returns after a temporary conversion to the state in which he was before. Here, then, is the grace of God supposed to be unable to attain its eifect of itself, and that effect supposed to depend upon the concurrence of man. It is allowed by the Arminians, that none can be saved without the grace of God ; but it is not allowed that the reason why some are saved and not others, is to be found in that grace. For while the grace of God and the will of man are conceived to be partial causes, concurring in the production of the same effect, the grace of God is only a remote cause of salvation — a cause ope- rating indifferently upon all, sufficient indeed, but often ineffectual. The proximate, specific cause of salvation, by which the effects of the universal cause are discriminated, is to be found in the qualities of the subject which receives the grace of God, since upon these qualities it depends whether this grace shall overcome or shall be counteracted. The Arminians attempt to remove this objection to their system, by reasoning in the following manner. Although God is omnipotent, he cannot put forth his irresistible power in communicating his grace 48* 4 C 546 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC to the mind of man, because he must govern his creatures according to their natures. But a grace which cannot bo resisted would destroy the morality of human actions ; and, instead of improving the cha- racter of a reasonable agent, would leave no room for any thing that deserves the name of virtue. It follows, therefore, from the nature of man, and the purpose for which grace is bestowed upon him, that it must be left in his power and in his choice, whether he will comply with it or not ; in other words, the grace of God must be resistible in this sense and to this amount, that its efficacy must depend upon the concurrence of the being on whom it is exerted. This reasoning of the Arminians constitutes one of their chief ob- jections to the Calvhiistic system, which represents the mind of man as effectually determined by the grace of God; and if the objection has ail the weight which the reasoning seems to imply, that system cannot be true ; for it is impossible that that can be a just account of the grace of God, which is inconsistent with the character of man, and subversive of morality. The objection will be discussed, when we advance to the difficulties that belong to the Calvinistic system. In the mean time, it is to be remembered that the Arminians, in their zeal to steer clear of this difficulty, have adopted such an account of the grace of God, as implies that, antecedently to its operations, the minds of some men are disposed to comply with it, and the minds of others to reject it ; and that, in whatever words they choose to mag- nify the grace of God, they cannot regard it as the cause of this dif- ference. For if the grace which is given indifferently to two persons, John and Judas, which is sufficient for both, and which may be re- sisted by both, is not resisted by John, and in consequence of that non-resistance conducts him to salvation, but is resisted by Judas, and in consequence of that resistance proves ineffectual with regard to him, the true cause of the efficacy and inefficacy of the grace lies in the minds of these two persons. " Thou didst give to my neighbour," may the former say, " as to me : but my will has improved what thou gavest, while the will of my neighbour has resisted all thine operations." This language, which the Arminians must suppose every one that is saved entitled to hold to the Almighty, by implying that man has something independent of the grace of God whereof he may boast, and whereby he may distinguish himself from other men in the sight of God, not only contradicts the doctrine of original sin, and those lessons of humility which the gospel uniformly teaches, but seems also to involve the Arminians themselves in contradiction. For while they say that no man is able of himself to understand, to think, or to will what is good, they suppose that only some men re- tain that carnal mind which the Scriptures call enmity to God, and by which the grace of God is defeated ; but that others are at all times ready of themselves to yield that compliance with the influ- ences of the Spirit, by which they are rendered effectual. And thus, while in words they ascribe all good works to the grace of God, they suspend the beginning, the progress, and tlie continuance of these good works upon the will of man. 3. The last difficulty which adheres to the Arminian system is, that it proceeds upon the supposition of a failure of the purpose of the SYSTEMS COMPARED. 547 Almighty, which it is not easy to reconcile with our notions of his sovereignty. In this system, the Almighty is conceived to have a purpose of bringing all men to salvation by Christ, and, in execution of this pur- pose, to furnish all men with sufficient means of salvation ; yet not- withstanding this purpose, and the execution of it by the grace of God, many continue in sin. Dr. Clarke has stated the difficulty, and has given the Arminian solution of it in one of his sermons upon the grace of God ; and as it is manifest from all his writings that he is there speaking his own sentiments, it will not be thought that I do any injustice to the Arminian system, by stating the solution of this third difficulty, in the words of an author so distinguished for the clearness of his conceptions, and the accuracy of his expressions, as Dr. Clarke. " The design of God in the gracious declarations of the gospel is to bring all men, by the promise of pardon, to repentance and amendment liere, and thereby to eternal salvation hereafter. The only difficulty here is, that which arises and indeed very obviously, from comparing the actual events of things, with the declarations of God's gracious intention and design. If God designed by the gracious terms of the gospel to bring all men to salvation, how comes the extent of it to be confined within so narrow a compass, and the effi^ct of it to be ill experience so inconsiderable, even where in profession it seems to have so universally prevailed ? The answer to this is, that in all moral matters, the intention or design of God never signifies (as it does always in natural things) an intention of the event actually and necessarily to be accomplished; but (which alone is consistent with the nature of moral things) an intention of all the means neces- sary on his part to the putting that event into the power of the proper and immediate agents."* According to this solution, that determination of the actions of men, which forms part of the Calvinistic system, is inconsistent with the nature of man, because the intention of God in moral matters never can go on to the event without destroying the character of moral agents. This objection to the Calvinistic system is the same in sub- stance with that which I stated under the former head, and will be considered afterwards. In the mean time, it is to be remembered that the Arminians are obliged either to deny that there is in God an intention to bring all men to salvation, or to admit that a great part of what is done in his creation is independent of his will. For although all the actions of wicked men in this world, and their ever- lasting condition hereafter, are, according to the Arminian system, foreseen by God, and being foreseen may be connected in the great plan of his providence with other events which are under his power, yet tliey are foreseen as arising from a cause over which he has no control, — from the will of man, which, after all his operations, deter- mined itself in many cases to choose the very opposite of that which he intended, and endeavoured to make it choose. If it shall appear that this emancipation of the actions of the creature from the direction of the Creator is an unavoidable consecpience of the character of reasonable beings, we must acquiesce in what appears to us an ira- • Serm. XII. Vol. 11. 548 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC perfection in the divine government. But until the inconsistency be- tween the providence of God, I mean not merely his foresight but his determination, and the freedom of his reasonable creatures be clearly established, we should be led, by all the views of the sove- reignty of the Creator which reason and Scripture give us, to suppose that no part of the universe is withdrawn from his control : and the harmony of the great plan of Providence must appear to us incon- sistent with the motley combination of natural events appointed by God, and actions of his creatures contrary to his purpose. The amount of the three difficulties which have now been stated, may be thus shortly summed up. The Arminian system lays down as a fundamental position, an administration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance ; a position which it is not possible to reconcile with what appears to be the fact : it resolves the salvation of those who are saved into the character of their mind antecedently to the operations of divine grace ; and it resolves the final reprobation of others into actions performed by the creatures of God, opposite to those which he furnished them with all the means necessary for performing, and conducting to an end different from that wliich he intended. Section II. The Arminian system was an attempt made by those who dis- claimed Socinian principles, to get rid of the difficulties which belong to the Calvinistic system. The embarrassment and inconsistency with which we have seen that attempt to be attended, and from which very able men have not found it possible to disentangle them- selves, is a proof that it is not an easy matter to devise a middle sys- tem between Socinianism and Calvinism. But if Calvinism be really involved in those insuperable difficulties which are perpetually in the mouths of its adversaries ; if it subverts the nature of man, and pre- sents the most unworthy conceptions of the Father of all, it cannot be true. The attempts to get rid of these difficulties may have been hitherto unsuccessful : but it is impossible to adopt any system to which such difficulties adhere ; and it were better, it may be thought, to acquiesce under a consciousness of our own ignorance in the em- barrassment of the Arminians, or even to advance to the simple unencumbered scheme of Socinus, than by following what we account truth far beyond the measure of our understandings, to confound all our notions both of God and of man. Before we come, however, to this desperate resolution, it is proper to bestow a very careful examination upon the difficulties which be- long to the Calvinistic system. They may be magnified by the mis- representations of its enemies : they may have arisen from some weakness in the reasoning or some narrowness in the views of its friends : they may be no other difficulties than such as our minds must expect to feel in every effort to form a conception of the obscure and magnificent subjects about which the two systems are conversant : and they may belong to the Arminian, in as far as it keeps clear of SYSTEMS COMPARED. 549 Socinianism, no less than to the Calvinistic. I enter upon the exa- mination of these difficuhies with a thorongh conviction of its being possible to state them in such a manner, that they shall not atford any- reasonable man a just ground for rejecting the system : and my exa- mination of them will have the appearance, which in my situation is decent, of an apology for Calvinism. I certainly desire that every one of my students should think as favourably of that system as I do, because, if they become licentiates or ministers of this church, they have to subscribe a solemn declaration, that they believe it to be true. But their conviction ought to arise from their own study — not from my teaching. They bring with them, from their previous studies, an acquaintance with the leading principles upon which my apology turns, sufficient to enable them to judge how far it is a fair one : and even had I that attachment to a system which I am conscious I have not, which would lead me to defend it by misrepresentation, I must be sensible that this would be the certain method of giving them an unfavourable impression of the system which I wish to recommend. The objections to the Calvinistic system, however multiplied in words or in divisions, may be reduced to two. It is conceived to be inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent ; and it is conceived to represent the Almighty in a light repugnant to our notions of his moral attributes. Section III. The Calvinistic system is conceived to be inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent. It is acknowledged by all that liberty is essential to the character of a moral agent ; that we are not accountable for those actions which we are compelled to perform ; that in every part of our conduct, in which external force does not operate upon the motions of our bodies, we have a feeling that whatever we do we might have done other- wise ; that we deserve praise for our good actions, because we might have acted wrong ; and that we deserve blame for our bad actions, because we might have acted well. In these points all are agreed. But it is said by those who do not hold the Calvinistic system, that the effectual irresistible grace, which, according to that system, is communicated to the elect, and by which they are infallibly determined to a certain line of conduct, degrades them from the character of agents to that of patients, — machines acted upon by another being, and thus destroys the morality of those very actions which they are determined to perform. As it is impossible that a religion proceeding from the Author of human nature can so directly subvert the princi- ples of that nature, the manner of applying the Gospel remedy, which is essential to the Calvinistic system, is considered as of itself a demonstrative proof that tliis system exhibits a false view of Chris- tianity. The whole force of this objection turns upon the ideas that are formed of the liberty of a moral agent. To those who form one idea 550 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC of liberty, the objection constitutes an insurmountable difficulty. To those who form another idea, it admits of a satisfying answer. There is one idea of liberty, adopted and strenuously defended by Dr. Reid, in his Essays on the Active Powers, which I shall give in his words. " By the liberty of a moral agent, I understand a power over the determinations of his own will. If, in any action, he had power to will what he did, or not to will it, in that action he is free. But if, in every voluntary action, the determination of his will be the necessary consequence of something involuntary in the state of his mind, or of something in his external circumstances, he is not free ; he has not what I call the liberty of a moral agent, but is subject to necessity."* The liberty here defined is sometimes called liberty of indifference, because it is supposed that, after all the circumstances which can lead to the choice of one, thing are presented, the mind re- mains in equilibrio, till she proceeds to exert her own sovereign power in making the choice. The exertions of this power are con- ceived to be independent of every thing external: the mind alone determines; and there is no fixed infallible connexion between her determinations and any foreign object. The definition of liberty given by Dr. Reid is that which Arminian writers adopt. Some of them speak Avith more accuracy than others ; but all of them agree that the liberty of a moral agent consists in the self-determining power ; that although he is frequently determined in his actions and resolutions by some cause foreign to the mind, he is not constantly and invariably so determined ; and that as the mind has a power of choosing without any reason, it is in every case un- certain how far she will exert this power, and consequently it is uncertain what the choice of the mind will prove, mitil it be made. Upon this foundation the Arminians build the impossibility of an absolute decree electing particular persons to eternal life, and giving them the means of attaining it. They say that faith and repentance, being the exercise of a self-determining power, originate purely in the mind ; that the Almighty cannot give an efficacious determining grace without destroying this self-determining power ; and therefore that all the decrees of God, in relation to moral agents, were either from eternity suspended upon their own determinations, or become per- emptory only by his foreseeing what these determinations are to be. iVlthough this account of the liberty of moral agents be adopted by the Arminians, it is not easily reconciled with the opinion Avhich they profess to hold, with regard to the extent and the infallibility of the divine foreknowledge. For as the determinations of free agents are the exertions of a power which is conceived to be unconnected and uncontrolled in its operations, there does not appear to us any method by which they can be certainly foreknown. When a future event is connected with any thing present, that connexion is a principle of knowledge with regard to it ; the more intimate the connexion is, the future event may be the more certainly known ; and if the connexion be indissoluble, a being to whom it is known is as certain that the future event will exist, as that any present object now is. But if a future event has no connexion with any thing present, it cannot be * Essay IV. ch. i. SYSTEMS COMPARED. 551 seen in its cause ; and the Socinian conclusion seems to be the natural one, that it cannot be foreseen at all. The Arniinians, indeed, distin- guish their system from Socinianism by rejecthig this conclusion. For although they consider the actions of moral agents to be contin- gent in this sense of the word, that they are not connected with any preceding event as their cause, and although they do not pretend to explain the manner in which such events can be certainly foreknown, yet they admit their being foreknown by God, and upon his infallible foreknowledge of them they build what they call the decree of elec- tion. The difficulty of reconciling what has been called liberty of indifte- rence with the infallible foreknowledge of God, is not the only objec- tion to this account of liberty. Liberty belongs to an agent, not to a faculty. A power in the mind to determine its own determinations is either unmeaning, or supposes, contrary to the first principles of philosophy, something to arise without a cause ; and it lands those by whom it is defended in various inconsistencies. These points it is not my business to state more particularly. They are unfolded in the chapter of Mr. Locke's Essay, entitled. On Power ; and they are elu- cidated with much metaphysical acuteness, and with great fulness of illnstration, in Edwards's Essay on Free-will. On the other hand, Dr. Clarke has stated the Arminian account of liberty in a close and guarded manner, — in a form the most accurate, and the least objec- tionable, that the subject will admit of. This statement occurs in different parts of Dr. Clarke's works ; particularly in his Demonstra- tion of the Being and Attributes of God, and in some of his replies to papers of Leibnitz. One of Dr. Whitby's discourses on the Five Points is an essay on the freedom of the will of man. The Arminian account of liberty is fully stated by King in his Essay on the Origin of Evil ; and there is a defence of it, loose, but copious and plausible, in the Essay already referred to, by Dr. Reid, On the Liberty of moral agents. Without pursuing the investigation how far liberty of indifference is rational and consistent, I proceed to state the grounds of -that other idea of the liberty of moral agents, which is essential and fundamen- tal in the Calvinistic system. The liberty of a moral agent consists in the power of acting accord- ing to his choice ; and those actions are free, which are performed without any external compulsion or restraint, in consequence of the determinations of his own mind. The determinations of the mind are formed agreeably to the laws of its nature, by the exercise of its po\vers in attention, deliberation, and choice : they are its own deter- minations, because they proceed upon the views which it entertains of the subject in reference to \yhich it determines ; and tlie manner in which the determinations are formed implies that essential distinction between mind and matter, in consequence of which mind is by its constitution susceptible of a moral character. Matter is acted upon by other objects, and receives from this impulse a particular figure or motion ; but it has no consciousness of the change induced upon its state, no powers to put forth in accomplishing the change, no choice of the effect which is to follow. There is a physical impossibility that the effect can be any other than that which may be calculated from 552 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC taking into account the quantity and direction of the impulse, in con- junction with the size, the quahty, and the situation of the body which receives it. But this indifference to every kind of impression, which enters into our conception of body, and in consequence of wiiich we give it the epithets passive and inert, is repugnant to our idea of mind. We conceive that the actions of a man originate in the exertions of his mind ; that powers are there put forth ; that the mind makes a selection out of many objects, any one of which it was not physically impossible to choose ; that in tlie preference given to those means Avhich are employed to bring about an end, there is a choice — a will discovered, which renders the mind worthy of praise or blame, and gives to the conduct that direction by which it is denominated either good or bad. This exertion of the innate powers of action, by whicli mind is distinguished from matter, may be called the self-determining power of the mind ; and if this were all that the Arminians meant by that phrase, the Calvinists would readily join in the use of it. But it is to be observed, that a general principle of activity, and a determination to a particular mode of action, are totally different : and after we have admitted that the actions of a man originate in the exertions of liis mind, it remauis to be inquired what determines the mind to one kind of exertion rather than another. The Arminians say the mind determines itself; which to the Calvinists appears to be no answer to the question, because in their opinion it means no more than that the mind has a power of determining itself They hold that no event liappens, either in the natural, or in the moral world, without a cause. They hold that God, who exists necessarily, is the only Being who has the reason of his existence in himself Because he now is, he always was, and he always will be. But every other being is con- 1 ingent, i. e. it may be or it may not be : the reason of its existence, therefore, cannot be in itself, but must be in something else. The whole universe is contingent, deriving the reason of its existence from the will of the Creator ; and every particular being and event in the universe lias that connexion with something going before it, by which it forms part of the plan of Providence, and, although known to us only when it comes into existence, was certain from the beginning, and was known as certain to Him in whose mind the whole plan ori- ginated. These general principles, which constitute the foundation of the Calvinistic system, are equally applicable to the events of the natural and the moral world. The various changes upon matter, which are the events of the natural world, arise from a succession of operations, every one of which, being the effect of something previous, becomes in its turn the cause of something that follows. The particular determinations of mind, which may be considered as events arising in the moral world, have their causes also which we are accustomed to call motives, that is, inducements to act in a particular manner, which arise from the objects presented to the mind, and the views of those objects which the mind entertains. The causes of the events in the natural world are eflicient causes, which act upon matter ; the causes of events in the moral world are final causes, with reference to which the mind, in which the action originates, proceeds, volun- SYSTEMS COMPARED. 553 tarily and deliberately, to put forth its own powers. But the direction ot the action towards its final cause is not less certain than the direc- tion of the motion produced in an inert passive substance, by the force impressed upon it, which is the efficient cause of the motion. While I continue to view an object in a particular light, its influence upon my conduct continues. While I propose to myself a certain end, and perceive that.certain means are necessary to attain that end, I employ those means. If I propose other ends, or change my opinion as to the means, there will be a consequent change in my conduct. Although the determinations of mind thus admit of certainty, by means of their connexion with final causes, this certainty is essentially different from absolute necessity. A thing is said to be necessary, when its opposite implies a contradiction. The three angles of a triangle must be equal to two right angles. Absolute necessity, there- fore, excludes the possibility of choice, because, when of two things one must be, and the other cannot be, there is no room for preferring the one to the other. But two opposite determinations of mind are equally possible ; both being contingent, either the one or the other may be ; and the certainty that one of them shall be, is only what is called moral necessity, which is in truth no necessity at all ; because it arises not from the impossibility of the other determination, but merely from the sufficiency of the causes that are employed to produce the eifect. The word effect implies, in every case, the previous existence of causes sufficient for its production. It appears, because they are sufficient; so that their sufficiency involves the certainty of its appearing. In every determination that is finally taken, there was this sufficiency of causes ; and, consequently, before it was taken, there was a certainty that it would be such as it is. Yet, in all its determinations, the mind acts according to its nature, deliberates, judges, chooses, without any feeling of restraint, but with a full impression that it is exerting its own powers. If the determinations of moral agents are thus certainly directed by motives, it is plain that the Almighty, whose will gave existence to tlie universe, and by whose pleasure every cause operates and every effect is produced, gives their origin to these determinations, by the execution of the great plan of his providence. For as there entered into his plan all those efficient causes whose successive operation produces the motions and changes of the material world, so there are brought forward, in succession, by the execution of this plan, all those objects which present themselves to the mind as final causes. Could we suppose a being, who, without any influence in ordering the con- nexion of things, foresaw, from the beginning, what that connexion would be, and had a mind capable of comprehending the whole series, he would, at the same time, foresee all the exertions of mind in refe- rence to final causes. And if the being who possesses this foresight is no other than the Almighty, upon whose will the whole disposition of the events that are connected together, depends, it is plain that, by altering this disposition, he would alter those exertions of mind which it calls forth, and, therefore, that all the exertions which are actually made constitute a part of his plan. But this does not, in the smallest degree, diminish what we call the liberty of moral agents. For final causes operate upon them according to their nature, in the same 49 4B 554 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC manner as if there were no such foresight and pre-ordination : they shun what is evil ; they desire what is good ; they are directed in their determinations by the light in which objects appear to them, without inquiring — without being impressed at the time of the direc- tion with any desire to know — whether the good and evil came from the appointment of a wise being, or whether it arose fortuitously. It is present, and it operates because it is present, not because it was foreseen. The mind feels its inliuence ; and this feeling is totally distinct from the calm judgment which the mind may, upon reflection, form with regard to the origin of that influence. It seems to result from the simple view we have taken of the subject, that the operation of motives will be uniform ; that, as the strength of the motive may in every case be estimated, the effect will appear to correspond to its cause ; and that there will be as little variety in the determinations of diiferent minds, to whom the same final cause is presented, as in the motions of bodies which receive the same foreign impulse. Yet the fact is, that motives are very far from operating according to their apparent strength ; that men are daily acting in contradiction to those moral inducements which, in all reason, ought to determine their conduct; and that the same motives, by which the determinations of one man are guided, have not an abiding influence, and often hardly any perceptible influence upon another man to whom they appear to be equally present. In some men, the understanding does not separate readily between truth and falsehood, or possesses in so slender a degree the faculty of compre- hending the parts of a complex object, and of tracing consequences, that, in most cases, neither the end nor the means appear to them such as they really are. In other men, whose understanding is not defective, there are particular affections and inferior appetites, which either insensibly bias the will, and even pervert the understanding, or whose violence dictates a choice opposite to that which should result, from the calm judgment of the understanding. And in many men there is an indecision — a want of vigour — an apprehension of diffi- culties, by which the final determinations of their minds, and the conduct which they pursue in life, are very different from what they themselves approve. However plausible, then, the theory may be, which represents motives as final causes calling forth the exertions of mind, yet, when we come to apply this theory to fact, the real influence of these causes becomes a matter of very complicated calculation. We have to con- sider the strength of the motives not abstractedly, but in conjunction with the particular views formed by the mind to which they are pre- sented ; and there enters into the formation of these views such a variety of circumstances respecting the state of the mind, generally unknown to observers, or inexplicable by them, and often unper- ceived by the mind itself, that the final determination appears in many cases nearly as wayward and capricious as if it was not connected with any thing previous, but the mind did really exert that uncon- trolled sovereignty over its own determinations, to which the Armin- ians give the name of the self-determining power. Notwithstanding this complication of circumstances that require to be considered in estimating the influence of motives, it is a matter of SYSTEMS COMPARED. 555 frequent experience, that we may be so well acquainted with the character of a person's mind, witli all the springs of action by which ho is moved, and with the situation in which he is placed, as to judge, with very little danger of mistake, what line of conduct he will pur- sue. And it is possible, by the information and suggestions that are conveyed to his understanding, and by a skilful and continued appli- cation of the objects best fitted for rousing his passions, and interesting his atfections, to obtain an entire ascendency over his mind, and to command his sentiments and purposes. Many persons find it for their interest or their pleasure to study the art of leading the minds of others, and to devote themselves to the practice of this, art ; and the history of the world is full of instances in which the art has been successful. The success has sometimes proved hurtful to the civil and political liberties of mankind ; but it has never been considered as impairing that liberty of which we are now speaking — the liberty which is necessary to constitute the persons thus led, moral agents. Their determinations, although foreseen by their sagacious neighbours before they were formed, — although formed upon the view of objects not sought after by themselves, but put in their way by those neigh- bours, were still their own determinations; the spontaneous result of their own active powers, in which they had all the feeling of choice, and liberty, and mental exertion ; of self-approbation if they chose right; of self-reproach if they chose wrong. Although the investigation of the character of others be to us laborious, and full of mistake ; although our efforts to direct the minds of others be -often rendered abortive by some oversight and negligence on our part, by some change upon theirs, or by some unlooked-for event, we can easily account for this imperfection by the present state of human nature ; and we do not find it difficult to rise, from what we ourselves experience, to the conception of that intuitive know- ledge, and that entire direction of the determinations of mind, which belong to the Supreme Being. He who formed the human heart knows what is in man : he knows our thoughts afar off, long before they arise in our breasts — long before the objects by which they are to be excited have been presented to ns. He, who is intimately pre- sent through his whole creation, marks, without fatigue, or the possibility of misapprehension, every the minutest shade that dis- tinguishes the character of one man from that of another: every difference in their situation, every variety in the views which they form of the same objects. And all these things are known to him not merely as they arise. They originated in that plan which from the beginning, was formed in the Divine Mind, and which was executed in time by his pleasure ; so that their being future, or present, or past, does not make the smallest difference in the clearness, the facility, and the certainty, with which he knows them. If all the circumstances presented to the minds of his creatures, and constituting moral inducements to a certain line of conduct, are a part of the plan of the Almighty, it is in his power to accommodate these circumstances to the varieties which he perceives in the characters of mankind, so as to lead them certainly in the path which he chooses f )r them. We observe, in the history of the human race, what we 46 556 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC call a national character, formed by that concurrence of natural and mora, causes, which every sound theist ascribes to the providence of Him who is Governor among the nations. We observe, in private life, how much the characters of those with whom we have inter- course depend upon their education, their society, their employments, and the events which befal them ; and we can conceive these and other circumstances combined in the lot of an individual by the dis- position of Heaven, so as to have a most commanding influence in eradicating from his breast the vices which were natural to him, and in caUing forth the continued and vigorous exercise of every virtuous principle. This influence is the meaning of an expression in theo- logical books, gratia congrua, that is, grace exercised in congruity to the disposition of him who is the subject of it, accommodating circumstances to his character in that manner which the Almighty foresees will prove effectual for the purpose of leading him to faith and repentance. This is the account which some writers of the Church of Rome, of great eminence in their day, chose to give of the efficacy of divine grace ; it was probably included in the expression used by Arminius, that the means of grace are administered jiixta sapientiam ; and it seems to have been adopted by the earliest followers of Arminius. The account of the efficacy of divine grace, which may be shortly expressed by the phrase gratia congrua, pro- ceeds upon the view that has been given of the influence of motives ; and to all who admit that the influence of motives upon the mind may certainly direct the conduct, this account cannot appear incon- sistent with the principles of human nature. But it was rejected by the successors of Arminius, in their confessions of faith, as inconsistent with an intention to save all men, and as implying a precise and absolute intention of saving some, effectually carried into execntion by the congruity of the grace which is administered unto them. It is rejected by the modern Arminians as inconsistent with what they call the self-determining power of the mind : and it is considered by the Calvinists as liable to objections, and as insufficient of itself to produce the effects ascribed to it. Gratia congrua appears to the Calvinists to imply an exercise of scientia media ; because it implies that the minds of those who are to be saved, are considered as having an existence, and as possessing a determinate character, independently of the divine decree, and that the administration of the means of grace is directed by a reference to that character. It appears to the Cal- vinists to be contradicted, as far as we can judge, by fact. For as the most favourable circumstances did not conduct the Jews, among whom our Saviour lived, to faith in the true Messiah, or preserve Judas, a member of his family, from the blackest guilt, while many among the heathen, without any preparation, were turned, at the first sound of the gospel, from idols, to serve the living God ; so, in every age, the concurrence of all the advantages, which education and opportunities can aflbrd, proves ineffectual in regard to some ; while others, with the scantiest means of improvement, attain the character of those who shall be saved. Gratia congrua appears further to the Calvinists not to come up to the import of those expres- sions, by which the Scripture describes the operation of the grace of SYSTEMS COMPARED. 557 God upon the soul, nor to imply a remedy suited to that degree of corruption in human nature, which they think may be fairly inferred both from experience and from Scripture. For all these reasons, the palvinists consider the efficacy of divine grace as consisting in an immediate action of the Spirit of God upon the soul. This part of their doctrine may be easily represented in such a light, as if it were subversive of the nature of a moral agent; and much occasion has been given for such representations by the unguarded expressions of those who wish to magnify the divine power displayed in this action. But as it is of more importance to know how the doctrine may be stated in consistency Avith those fun- damental principles which cannot be renounced, than how it has been misstated, I shall not dilate on the exaggerations either of its friends or of its adversaries, but simply present such a view of it as appears to me perfectly agreeable both to the words of our Confession of Faith, and to the account which has been given of the liberty of a moral agent. It is manifest that the uncertainty in the operation of motives, which was formerly mentioned, arises from the corruption of human nature ; in other words, from the defects of the understanding and the disorders of the heart. If the understanding always perceived things as they are, and if the afiections were so balanced in the soul, as never to dictate any choice in opposition to that which appears to be best, there would be an uniformity in the purposes and the con- duct of all to whom the same motives are presented. But if, accord- ing to the descriptions which the Calvinists find in Scripture, and which they adopt as the foundation of their system, the corruption of human nature be such as to blind the understanding, and to give infe rior appetites that dominion in the soul which was originally assigned to reason and conscience, all the multiplicity of error, and all the caprice of ungoverned desire, come in to give variety and uncertainty to the choice of the mind. The only method of removing this un certainty of choice is by removing the corruption from which it pro* ceeds. And this is allowed, by all who hold that there is such a cor- ruption, to be the work, not of the creature who is corrupt, but of the Creator. This work is expressed in Scripture by such phrases a.nrpose. For it is a matter of very little importance in what manner writers, whose names arc de- servedly forgotten, arranged the rank and the subordination of those beings, to whom their imagination gave existence. 564 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC of Manes eclipsed all the other founders of the Gnostic sects ; and his doctrine, which was once diffused over a great part of the Christian world, is still familiar to every scholar under the name of Manicheism. Manes made the evil principle, which he called v^, matter, co-eternal with the Supreme Being. To the power of this principle, indepen- dent of God, and acting in opposition to him, Manes ascribed all the evil that now is, and that will for ever continue to exist in the world. He considered the sins of men as proceeding from the suggestions and impulse of this spirit ; and the corruption of human nature as consist- ing in this, that besides the rational soul, which is an emanation from the Supreme Being who is light, the body is inhabited and actuated by a depraved mind which originates from the evil principle and retains the character of its author. This was the system by which Manes, treading in the steps of many who went before him, and studying to improve upon their defects, attempted to account for the existence of moral evil. But as this system, in order to preserve the honour of the moral attributes of the Deity, admits such limitations of liis power as are inconsistent with the independence and sovereignty of the Lord of nature, it must be renounced by all who entertain those exalted conceptions of the divine majesty which are agreeable to rea- son, and illustrated by Scripture, or who pay due attention to the revelation given in Scripture, of those evil spirits who oppose the pur- poses of divine grace. We believe that the Almighty was before all things ; that every thing which is, derived its existence, its form, and its powers from his will ; that his councils are independent of every other being ; that the strength of his creatures, all of whom are his servants, cannot for a moment counteract the working of his arm, and that the world is what he willed it to be. We learn from Scripture that there are higher orders of being, not the objects of our senses, who are the creatures of God, and of whom an innumerable company run to fulfil his pleasure. We learn that some of these beings, fey disobeying their Creator, forfeited the state in which he first placed them ; that their depravity is accompanied with a desire to corrupt others ; that one of them was the tempter of our first parents, and that he still continues to exert an influence over the minds of their posterity, by enticing them to sin. But the Scriptures guard us against supposing that this evil spirit is rendered by his apostacy in- dependent of the Supreme Being. For by many striking expressions in the ancient books, and by the whole series of facts and declarations in the New Testament, we are led to consider him as entirely under the command and control of the Creator, permitted to exert a certain degree of influence for a season, but restrained and counteracted during that season, by a power infinitely superior to his own, till the time arrive when he is to be bound in everlasting chains, and his works destroyed. It appears, then, that the account of the origin of evil, which is characteristical of the Manichean system, does not receive any degree of countenance from that revelation of the invisible world which the Scriptures give. There is indeed mentioned in various parts of Scrip- ture, incidentally and with much obscurity, a connection between us. and other parts of the universe, — an influence exerted over the hu- SYSTEMS COMPARED. 565 man race by beings far removed from our observation, who are the creatures and the subjects of Him wlio made us. The spirits who stand before the Ahiiighty are sent forth to minister to the heirs of salvation ; and the spirits who rebehed against him seek to involve us in the guilt and the misery of their rebelhon. This incidental opening suggests to our minds a conception of the unity of the great moral system, of the mutual subserviency of its parts, and of the multiplicity of those relations by which tlie parts are bound together; a conception somewhat analogous to those ideas of reciprocal action in the immense bodies of the natural system, upon which the received principles of astronomy proceed, and which the progress of modern discoveries has very much confirmed. Our faculties are not adequate to the full comprehension of such connexions, either in the natural or in the moral world. But the hints which are given may teach us humility, by showing how much remains to be known : they may enlarge and elevate our ideas of the magnificence and order of the work of God ; and they conspire in imprinting on our minds this first lesson of religion, that every part of that work is his, that the super- intendence and control of the Supreme Mind extends throughout the whole, and that we give a false account of every phenomenon either in the natural or in the moral world, when we withdraw it from the all-ruling providence of Him, without whose permission nothing can be, and whose energy pervades all the exertions of his creatures. If we say that moral evil exists in the world, because, by the con- stitution under which we live, the eflects of the disobedience of our first parents are transmitted to their posterity, we explain, agreeably to the information afforded in Scripture, the manner in which sin was introduced, but we do not account for its introduction ; for that constitution, to which we ascribe its continuance in the world, was established by God ; and after we have been made to ascend this step, we are left just where we Avere, to inquire why the Almighty not only permitted moral evil to enter, but established a constitution by which it is propagated. If we attempt, as has often been done, to account for moral evil by the necessary limitation in the capacities of all created beings, we are in danger of returning to the principles of the Gnostics, who ascribed an essential pravity to matter, which not even the power of the Almighty can subdue. If we say that moral evil is subservient to the good of the universe, we seem to be warranted by many analogies in the structure and operations of our own frame, where pain is a preparative for pleasure, — in the appear- ances of the earth, and the vicissitudes to which it is subject, where irregularity and deformity contribute to the beauty and preservation of "the whole, — in society, where permanent and universal good often arises out of partial and temporary evil. Such analogies have often been observed, and they constitute both a delightlul and an useful part of natural history :* but when we attempt to apply them to the system of the universe, as an account of that evil which has been, and which always will be, which affects the character as well as the happiness of rational agents, and excludes tiiem from the hope of recovering that rank which they had lost, we find that we have got * Paley's Natural Theology. Goodness of the Deity. 50 566 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC beyond our depth. The idea may be just, but -we are bewildered in the inferences which we presume to draw from it : ahhough we per- ceive numberless instances in which partial good arises out of partial evil, yet we are unable to explain what is the subserviency to good in the whole system of that evil which is permanent ; and after being pressed with difficulties on every side, we are obliged to confess our ignorance of the extent and the relations of the great subject con- cerning which we speculate. Having seen the insufficiency of the various attempts made in an- cient and modern times, to solve the great problem of natural religion, it only remains for us to rest in those fundamental principles of which we have sufficient evidence. We know that God is wise and good, and that as nothing in the universe has power to defeat or counteract his purposes, all things that are, entered into the great plan which he formed from the beginning. Hence we infer that the universe, understanding by that word the whole series of causes and eflects, and the whole succession of created beings, is, such as we behold it, the work of God. Why it is not more perfect we know not. But from the single fact that it is, we infer that it answers the purposes of the Creator. He did not choose it on account of its imperfections : but these imperfections were not hidden from his view, nor are they independent of his will ; and he chose it out of all the possible worlds which he might have made, because, with all its imperfections, it pro- motes the end for which it was made. That end, being such as God proposed, must be good ; and the world, being the fittest to promote that end, must, notwithstanding its imperfections, be such as it was worthy of God to produce. It does not appear to me that human reason can go farther upon this subject. I am sensible that this is a method of accounting for the existence of evil, not very flattering to the pride of our understand- ings, and not much fitted to affi^rd a solution of those difficulties which exercise our curiosity. It is deducing a vindication of what is done, not from our reasonings and views, but from the fact that it is done. But to this kind of vindication we are obliged perpetually to have recourse in all parts both of natural and of revealed religion ; and to those who consider it unsatisfying I can give no better counsel than to read and ponder Bishop Butler's Analogy, which, of all the books that ever were written by men, is the best calculated to check the extravagance of our shallow speculations concerning the govern- ment of God. When I stated the objection to the Calvinistic system, that it is in- consistent with the goodness of God, the objection appeared to be resolvable into the question concerning the origin of evil ; and now that we have attained the philosophical answer to that question, we find ourselves brought back to the principles of Calvinism. It was objected to the Calvinistic system that if God withholds from some, the special grace which would have led them to repentance, their sin and misery may be traced back to him. But we have seen that all the moral evil in the world may in like manner be traced back to God, because the great plan, of which that moral evil is a part, originated from his counsel ; so that the answer to this objection SYSTEMS COMPARED. 5G7 against Calvinism is precisely the same with the philosophical answer to the question concerning moral evil. It is seen that some do not repent and believe ; but their conduct, like every other event in the universe, was comprehended in the divine plan ; in other words, because God has not conferred upon them that grace which would have led them to pursue a different conduct, we infer that it was not his original purpose to confer that grace, and we believe that the pur- pose is good because it is his. The Arminians are compelled to have recourse to the very same answer, although they attempt, by their system, to shift it for a little. They say that men do not repent and believe, because they resist that grace which might have led them to repentance and faith. But why do they resist this grace ? The Arminians answer, that the resistance arises from the self-determining power of the mind. But why does one mind determine itself to submit to this grace and another to resist it? If the Arminians exclude the infallible operation of every foreign cause, they must answer this question by ascribing the difference to the different character of the minds ; and then one question more brings them to God, the Father of spirits. For if these different characters of mind be supposed to have existed independently of the divine will, a sufficient account is indeed given why some are pre- destinated and others are reprobated ; but it is an account which withdraws the everlasting condition of his reasonable offspring from the disposal of the Supreme Being : whereas if it be admitted that he who made them gave to their minds the qualities by which they are distinguished, and ordained all the circumstances of their lot which conspire in forming their moral character, the resistance given by some is referred to his appointment. It appears to be an incontro- vertible truth, a truth the evidence of which is implied in the terms in which it is enunciated, that the gifts of nature and the gifts of grace proceed equally from the good pleasure of him who bestows them : and if this fundamental proposition be granted, then the Calvinistic and Arminian systems lead ultimately to the same conclusion. The Arminians ascribe the faith and good works of some to a predisposi- tion in their own minds for receiving the means which God has pro- vided for all, and to the favourable circumstances which cherish this disposition ; and the impenitence and unbelief of others to the obstinacy of their hearts, and to a concurrence of circumstances by which that obstinacy is prevented from yielding to the means of improvement. The Calvinists ascribe the faith and ffood works of some to an imme- diate and supernatural operation of the Spirit of God upon their souls, by which the means of improvement are rendered effectual ; and the impenitence and unbelief of others to that withholding of the grace of God, by which the most favourable situation b(;comes ineffectual for leading them to eternal life. In either case that God, who forms the heart and who orders the lot of all his creatures, executes his pur- pose ; and although the steps be somewhat different in the two systems, yet, according to both, the ultima ratio, the true reason why some are saved and others are not, is the good pleasure of Him who, by a different dispensation of the gifts of nature and of grace, might have saved all. What the ends are which God proposed to himself, by saving some 568 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC instead of saving all, we are totally unqualified to explain. Agree- ably to the expression used in our Confession of Faith,* the Cal- vinists are accustomed to say that the great end of the whole system is the glory of God, or the illustration of his attributes; that as he displayed his mercy by saving some from that guilt and misery in which all were involved, so he displays his justice by punishing others for that sin, in which, according to his sovereign pleasure, he chose to leave them. Arminian writers are accustomed to reprobate, with much indignation, an expression which appears to them to represent the glory of God as a separate end, pursued by him for his own pleasure, without any consideration of the happiness of his creatures, or any attention to their ideas of justice. But, bearing in mind the whole character of the Deity, considering that He, who may do what he will, being infinitely wise and good, can do nothing but what is right, it is obvious that his glory is inseparably connected with the happiness of his creatures. What the weakness of our understanding leads us to call different parts of a character, are united with the most indissoluble harmony in the divine mind ; and his works, which illustrate his attributes, do not display any one of them in such a manner as to obscure the rest. From this perfect harmony between the wisdom and goodness of God, his creatures may rest assured that every circumstance which concerns their welfare is effectually provided for in that system which he chose to produce; and the whole universe of created intelligence could have chosen nothing for themselves so good, as that which is ordained to be, because it illustrates the glory of the Creator. At the same time, it nnist be acknowledged, that we do not make any advances in our acquaintance with the ends of the system by adopting this expression. The expression implies that there is a balance or proportion among the different attributes, that the display of one is bounded by the dis- play of another, and that there are certain limits of every particular attribute implied in the perfection of the divine mind. But it leaves us completely ignorant of the nature of those limits, and it does not presume to explain why the justice of God required the condemnation of that precise number who are left to perish, and how his mercy was fully displayed in the salvation of that precise number who are called the elect. We are still left to resolve the discrimination which was made, and the extent of that discrimination, into the good plea- sure of God ; by which phrase is meant, not the will of a being acting capriciously for his own gratification, but a will determined by the best reasons, although these reasons are beyond our comprehension ; and all doubts and objections, which the narrowness of our views might suggest, are lost in that entire confidence, with which the mag- nificence of his works and the principles of our nature teach us to look up to a Being, of whom, and by whom, and to whom are all things. It may be thought, upon a superficial view, that the account which has been given of the origin of evil represents sin as not less agreea- ble to the Almighty than virtue, since both enter into the plan which he ordained, and both are considered as the fulfilment of his purpose. * Confession of Faith, iii. 3. SYSTEMS COMPARED. 569 This specious and popular objection has often been urged with an air of triumph against the Calvinistic system. But the principles which have been stated furnish an answer to the objection. The evil that is in the universe was not chosen by God upon'its own ac- count, but was permitted upon account of its connexion with that good which he chooses. The precise notion of God's permitting evil is this, that his power is not exerted in hindering that from coming into existence, which could not have existed independently of his will, and which is allowed to exist, because, although not in itself an ob- ject of his approbation, it results from something else. According to this notion of the permission of evil, we say that although this world, notwithstanding the evil that is in it, promotes the end which the Creator proposed, and carries into effect the purpose which he had in creating it, yet he beholds the good that is in the world with appro- bation, and the evil with abhorrence. We gather from all the con- ceptions which we are led to form of the Supreme Being that he can- not love evil : we feel that he has so constituted our minds that we always behold moral evil with indignation in others, with self-re- proach in ourselves : we often observe, we sometimes experience the fatal effects which it produces ; and we find all the parts of that reve- lation which the Scriptures contain, conspiring to dissuade us from the practice of it. In this entire coincidence between the deductions of reason, the sentiments of human nature, the influence of conduct upon happiness, and the declarations of the divine word, there is laid such a foundation of morality as no speculations can shake. This coincidence gives that direct and authoritative intimation of the will of our Creator, which was plainly intended to be the rule of our actions : and the assurance of the moral character of his government, which we derive from these sources, is so forcibly conveyed to our under- standings and our hearts, that if our reasonings upon theological sub- jects should ever appear to give the colour of truth to any views that are opposite to this assurance, we may, without hesitation, conclude that these views "are false. They have derived their colour of truth from oar presuming to carry our researches farther than the limited range of our faculties admits, and from our mistaking those difficul- ties which are unaccountable to an intelligence so finite as ours, for those contradictions which indicate to every intelligent being the falsehood of the proposition to which they adhere. These are the general principles, upon which the ablest defenders of the Calvinistic system attempt to vindicate that system from the charge of being inconsistent with the nature of man and the nature of God. As they furnish the answer to philosophical objections, I have stated them, as much as possible, in a philosophical form, with very little reference to the authority of Scripture, and without the use of those technical terms which occur in books of Theology. But it is not proper for us to rest in this form. To afford a complete view of the evidence and of the application of these principles, I mean first to present a comprehen- sive account of that support which the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture : secondly, to give a general history of Calvinism, of the re- ception which at different periods it has met with in the Christian church, and of what may be called its present state : — and then to conclude the subject by applying the principles which have been 50* 4F 570 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED. Stated as an answer to the two objections, in a concise discussion of various questions that have agitated the Christian church, and in an expKcation of various phrases that have been currently vised in treat- ing of these questions. The questions turn upon general principles, so that although they have been spread out in great detail, and al- though they seem to belong to different subjects, all that is necessary in discussing them is to show the manner in which the general prin- ciples apply to the particular questions. The general principles will be elucidated by this various application ; and we shall be able, after having travelled quickly over so much debateable matter, to mark the consistency with which all the parts of the Calvinistic system arise out of a few leading ideas. Reid on the Active Powers. King on the Origin of Evil. Clarke's Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God. Whitby on the Five Points. Locke. Edwards on Free Will. Butler's Analogy. CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 571 CHAPTER X. GENERAL VIEW OP THE SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. The passages adduced from Scripture by the friends and the adver- saries of this system are so numerous, and have received interpreta- tions so widely diiferent, that I should engage in an endless field of controversy, if I attempted to notice particular texts, and to contrast in every instance the Arminian and the Calvinistic exposition of them. But a labour so tedious and fatiguing is really unnecessary, for the same principles, upon which the Calvinistic exposition of one passage proceeds, apply to every other. Instead, therefore, of repeat- ing the same leading ideas with a small variation of form, I shall simply mention that an index of particular texts may be found in the proofs annexed to several chapters of the Confession of Faith, in the quotations that are made in every ordinary system under the several heads which belong to the doctrine of predestination, and in those books which should be read upon the subject. And I shall endeavour to arrange this multifarious matter under the three following heads, which appear to me to constitute the support which Scripture gives to the Calvinistic system. 1. All the actions of men, even those which the Scripture holds forth to our abhorrence, are represented as being comprehended in the great plan of divine providence. 2. The predestination of which the Scripture speaks is ascribed to the good pleasure of God. 3. And the various descriptions of that change of character, by which men are prepared for eternal life, seem intended to magnify the power, and to declare the efficacy of that grace by which it is produced. I shall then state the answers given by the Calyinists to that objection against their system which has been drawn from the commands, the counsels, and the expostulations of Scripture. Section I. All the actions of men, even those which the Scripture holds forth to our abhorrence, are represented as being comprehended in the great plan of divine providence. I do not mean merely that all the actions of men are foreseen by God. Of this the predictions in Scrip- ture afford evidence which even the Arminians admit to be incontro- 272 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES vertible. But I mean that the actions of men are foreseen by God not as events independent of his will, but as originating in his deter- mination, and as fulfilling his purpose. By many sublime expressions the Scriptures impress our minds with an idea of the universal sovereignty of God, of the extent and efficacy of his counsel, and of the uncontrolled operation of his power throughout all his dominions. Even those beings and events, that appear to counteract his designs, are represented as subject to his will, as not only at length to be subdued by him, but as promoting, while they operate, the end for which he ordained them. — Psal. Ixxvi. 10. — Prov. xvi. 4. — Is. xlv. 7. — Lam. iii. 37, 38. Such expressions receive a striking illustration from many of the histories recorded in Scripture. The barbarity of the brethren of Joseph, which filled their minds with deep remorse, was intended by God as an instrument of providing a settlement for the posterity of Abraham. " As for you," said Joseph to his brethren, Gen. I. 20, " ye thought evil against me ; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.'' God did not merely turn it to good after it happened, but he "meant it unto good." The obstinacy of Pharaoh, in refusing to let the people go out of that country to which the wickedness of the sons of Jacob had led them, was, in like manner, a part of the plan of divine providence; for, as God said unto Moses, Exod. x. 1, 2, " I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might show these my signs before him ; and that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought^in Egypt." '' I have hardened his heart," not by exerting any immediate influence leading him to sin, but by disposing matters in such a manner that he shall not consent ; he shall suffer for his obstinacy; but that obstinacy is appointed by me to give an opportunity of exhibiting those signs, which shall transmit the Law of Moses to future ages with unques- tionable proofs of its divine original. The folly of the princes, whose territories adjoined to the wilderness, in refusing the children of Israel a free passage when they went out of Egypt, the combination of the kings of Canaan, which brought destruction upon themselves, and the oppression and ravages of those who carried Israel into captivity, are all held forth in the historical and prophetical books of Scripture, as proceeding from the ordination of God. Of Cyrus the good prince, whose edict recalled the Jews from captivity, the Almighty says. Is. xliv. xlv. "He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure, even saying to Jerusalem, thou shalt be built ; mine anointed, whose right hand I have holden ; whom, for Jacob my servant's sake, I have called by his name." But of Nebuchadnezzer also, the destroyer of nations, whose pride is painted in the strongest colours, and whose punishment corresponded to the enormity of his crimes, thus saith the Almighty, Jer. xxvii. 4 — 8, " I have made the earth, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me : and now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzer the king of Babylon my servant." And again, Ezek. xxx. 24, 25, " I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword in his hand, — and he shall stretch it out upon the land of Egypt." The infidelity of the Jews who lived in our Saviour's time, the envy and malice of their rulers, and the injustice and violence with TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 573 which an innocent man was condemned to die, Avere crimes in them- selves most atrocious, and are declared in Scripture to have been the cause of that unexampled misery which the Jewish nation suffered. Yet all this is also declared, Acts ii. 23, to have happened, " by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God." And Acts iv. 27, <' Both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." And Peter, after relating the manner in which our Lord was put to death, adds the following words. Acts iii. 18 : " Those things which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled ;" i. e. the purpose of God in delivering the world embraced all the wicked actions of the persecutors of his Son, and could not have been accomplished in the manner which he had foretold with- out these actions. Hence it came to be necessary that these actions should be performed : and this necessity is intimated as in many other places of Scripture, so particularly Matth. xvi. 21. " Jesus began to show unto his disciples how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and be killed and be raised again the third day." In the original, the same verb 5« governs the infinitives a.rii%BBiv, TtaOiw, artoxtavet^vai, tyf^erjiui,; i. e. the form of the expression represents his going to Jerusalem, which was an action depending upon his own will, and his suflering many things of the chief priests, which depended upon their will, as being as unalterably fixed, and as having the same necessity of event as his resiu-rection from the dead, which was accomplished by an ex- ertion of divine power without the intervention of man. This last example is more particular and more interesting to us than any of the former : but it is exactly of the same order with the rest ; and all of them conspire in establishing the following positions: — that actions, contrary to the law of God, and to the principles of morality, may form part of that plan originally fixed and determined in the divine mind ; — that these actions do not lose any of their moral turpitude by being so determined, but continue to be the actions of the moral agents by whom they are performed, for which they de- serve blame and suffer punishment ; — and that actions thus wicked and punishable are made the instrument of great good. When we find these positions true in many particular instances, and also agree- ing with general expressions in Scripture, we conclude by fair induc- tion that they may hold true in the great system of the universe ,• and we seem to be warranted to say, not merely that the providence of God brings good out of evil when the evil happens ; — that is allowed by the Socinians who deny the divine foreknowledge ; — not merely that God, foreseeing wicked actions Avhich were to be performed, connected them in the plan of his providence with the events which he had determined to produce ; — this is what the Arminians say ; — but that the Supreme Being, to whom the series of events, of good and of bad actions that constitute the character of this \vorld, was from the beginning present, determined to produce this world ; that the bad, no less than the good actions result from his determination, and contribute to the prosperity of the whole ; and yet that the liberty of moral agents not being in the least affected by this determination, 574 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES they deserve praise or blame in the same mamier as if their actions had not been predetermined. But these are some of the fundamental principles of Calvinism ; and if the Scripture, both by general ex- pressions, and by instances illustrating and exemplifying such expres- sions, gives its sanction to these principles, we have found a consider- able support which the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture. Section II. The predestination, of which the Scripture speaks, is ascribed to the good pleasure of God. There does not occur in the Greek Testament any substantive word equivalent to predestination. But the verb rt^oogtfu, prssdestino, is used in diiferent places ; rt^o^sotj, txxoyrj, ixxextoi, also occur ;* and there does not appear to be any unwarrantable departure from the style of the New Testament in the language commonly used upon this sub- ject. But it is not agreed, and it is not incontrovertibly clear, whether the sacred writers employed the words upon which this language has been framed, in the sense affixed to it by the Calvinists. There are two systems upon this point ; and as these systems extend their in- fluence to the interpretation of a great part of Scripture, it is proper to state distinctly the grounds upon which they rest. The system by which all those, who do not hold the Calvinistic tenets, expound that predestination of which the Scripture speaks, is of the following kind. It appears from Scripture that God was pleased very early to make a discrimination amongst the children of Adam, as to the measure in which he imparted to them religious knowledge. The family of Abraham were selected amidst abounding idolatry to be the depositories of faith in one God, and of the hope of a Mes- siah : and they are presented to us in Scripture under the characters of the church, the peculiar people, the children of God. But the Old Testament contains many hints, which are fully unfolded in the New, of a purpose to extend the bounds of the church, and to admit men of all nations into that relation with the Supreme Being, which for many ages was the portion of the posterity of Abraham. This pur- pose, formed in the divine mind from the beginning, began to be exe- cuted when the apostles- of Jesus went forth preaching the gospel to every creature. It was a purpose so different from the prejudices in which they had been educated, and it appeared to their own minds so magnificent, so interesting and delightful, (after they were enabled to comprehend it,) that it occupies a considerable place in all their discourses and writings. It made a blessed change upon the moral and religious condition of the persons to whom these discourses and writings were generally addressed. For all former communications from heaven had been confined to the land of Judea ; and the other nations of the earth, having been educated in idolatry, had no here- ditary title to the privileges of the people of God. But the execution of that purpose declared in the gospel placed them upon a level with * Ephes. i. Rom. ix. xi. I Pet. i. 1. TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 575 the chosen race. Accord higly Paul, the apostle of the gentiles, in many of his epistles, addresses the whole body of professing Chris- tians to whom he writes, as elect, saints, predestinated to the adop- tion of children; and magnifies the purpose, or as he often calls it, the mystery, which in other ages was not made known, but had been revealed to him, and was published to all, that *» «««»?, the gentiles, who were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, were called to be fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of faith. Eph. iii. 3 — 7. By contrasting the enormity of the vices which had been habitual to them while they lived in idolatry, with the spiritual bless- ings, or the advantages for improving in virtue and attaining eternal life, which they enjoyed through the gospel, he cherishes their thank- fulness to God for his unmerited grace in pardoning their past trans- gressions, and he excites them to the practice of those virtues which became their new faith. When we employ this leading idea of all the epistles of Paul as a key to the meaning of particular passages which are much quoted in support of the Calvinistic system, the pre- destination of which he speaks, appears to be nothing more than the purpose of placing the inhabitants of all countries where the gospel is preached in the same favourable circumstances with respect to re- ligion as the Jews were of old : the elect are the persons chosen out of the world, and called to the knowledge of the gospel ; and the spiritual blessings, which the apostle represents as common to all the members of the Christian societies whom he addresses, are the ad- vantages flowing from that knowledge. It is allowed that predestination, even in this sense, originates in the good pleasure of God. As he chose the posterity of Abraham, not because they were more mighty or more virtuous than other nations, but because he loved their fathers, so he dispenses to whom- soever he will, the inestimable blessings connected with the publica- tion of the Gospel. To nations who had been the most corrupt this saving light was sent ; to individuals whose attainments did not seem to prepare them for this heavenly knowledge the Spirit revealed those " things that are freely given to us of God ;" and our Lord has taught us, that instead of presuming to complain of that revelation, which the Almighty was not bound to give to any, having been sent to some parts of the world and not to others, it is our wisdom and our duty to acquiesce in the sovereignty of the divine administration, and to say with him, Matth. xi. 25, 26, " Even so. Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight." But although those, who admit of predestination only in this sense, acknowledge that it originates in the good pleasure of God, yet they do not consider this acknowledgment as giving any countenance to the Calvinistic system. They say that we are not warranted to record expressions, which originally marked a purpose of sending the blessings of the Gospel to all countries, as implying a purpose of con- fining eternal life to some individuals in all countries; and that although the Sovereign of the universe is accountable to none in dis- pensing the knowledge of the Gospel, any more than in dispensing the measures of skill, sagacity, or bodily strength, by which indi- viduals are distinguished, because in the end he will render to all men according to their improvement of the advantages which they 576 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES enjoy, yet it does not follow that it is consistent with the impartiality and universal beneficence of our Father in heaven to make such a distinction in conferring inward grace, as shall certainly conduct some of his creatures to everlasting happiness, whilst others are left without remedy to perish in their sins. The system of interpretation which I have now explained has been adopted and defended by very able men ; by Whitby, the author of the commentary upon the New TestamerTt ; by Dr. Clarke, whose sermons discover more knowledge of Scripture than any other ser- mons that have been printed ; and by Taylor of Norwich, author of a Key to the Epistle to the Romans, who, in a long introductory essay, has unfolded the ideas now stated, and made various use of them. The system is extremely plausible. It draws an interpreta- tion of epistles, letters to different churches, from the known situation of these churches, and from the known ideas of the writer ; and by considering particular passages in connexion with the scope of the epistle, it gives an explication of them, which, in general, is most rational and satisfying. The light, which every one who has lectured upon an epistle can communicate to the people by the application of this system, is so pleasing to himself, and so instructive to them, that he is apt to be confirmed in thinking it the fidl interpretation of the writer's meaning. And I have no difficulty in saying, that if the Calvinistic doctrine derived no other support from Scripture than that which can fairly be drawn from our finding the words predestination, elect, and other similar words frequently recurring in the epistles, it might seem to an intelligent inquirer and a sound critic, that that doctrine had arisen rather by detaching particular texts from the con- texts, and applying them in a sense which did not enter into the mind of the sacred writers, than by forming an enlarged comprehension of their views. But after paying this just tribute to the system which I have ex- plained, and after admitting that more stress is laid upon some par- ticular texts, which are commonly quoted as Scripture authority for the Calvinistic doctrine, than they can well bear, I proceed to state fully the grounds of the other system of interpretation, according to which there is mention made in Scripture of a predestination of indi- viduals arising from the mere good pleasure of God : and I entertain no doubt that the observations now to be made will appear sufficient to warrant the Calvinists in saying, that they do not pervert Scripture, when they pretend to find a general language pervading many parts of it which evidently favours their doctrine. 1. The former interpretation proceeded upon this ground, that the epistles are addressed to Christian societies, all the members of which enjoyed in common the advantages of the preaching of the Gospel, but all the members of which cannot be supposed to have been in the number of those who shall finally be saved ; and hence it is inferred, that such expressions as occur in the beginning of the Epistle to the Ephesians, mean nothing more than that change upon their condition, that external advantage common to the whole society, which God, in execution of the purpose formed by him from the beginning, had, through the publication of the Gospel, conferred upon all. Admitting that many of the persons addressed as saints and elect shall not finally TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 577 be saved, still these words imply something more than a change upon the outward condition ; and there is no necessity for our departing so far from their natural and obvious meaning, as to bring it down to mere external advantage, because the apostle was not warranted to make a distinction between those who are predestinated to life, and those who are left to perish in their sins. This distinction is one of those secret things which belong to the Lord, and which he has not intrusted to his ministers. They are bound in charity to believe, that all to whom the external blessings are imparted, and who appear to improve them with thankfulness, receive also that inward grace by which these blessings are made effectual to salvation ; and they have no title to separate any persons from the society of the faithful, but those who have been guilty of open and flagrant transgressions. Such persons the apostle frequently marks out in his epistles ; and he warns the Christians against holding intercourse with them ; but to all who remained in the society, he sends his benediction, and of all of them he hoped things that accompany salvation. 2. Although many passages in the epistles, which speak of predes- tination and of the elect, might seem to receive their#full interpreta- tion from the purpose of God to call other nations besides the Jews to the knowledge of the Gospel, yet there are places in the epistles of Paul, which intimate that he had a further meaning. Of this kind is the ninth chapter to the Romans, and a part of the eleventh ; two passages of Scripture which give the greatest trouble to those who deny the truth of the Calvinistic doctrine, which have received a long commentary from Arminius himself, and from many Arminian writers, but which, after all the attempts that have been made to accommodate them to their system, are fitted, in my opinion, to leave upon the mind of every candid reader, an indelible impression that this system does not come up to the mind of the apostle. The ninth chapter to the Romans is one of the most difficult passages in Scripture ; and I am far from saying that the Calvinistic system makes it plain. There is an obscurity and extent in the subject which is beyond the reach of our faculties, and which represses our presumptuous attempts to penetrate the counsels of the Almighty. But after reading that chap- ter, and the eleventh, with due care in the original, the amount of them, it will probably be thought, may be thus stated. God chose the posterity of Abraham out of all the families of the earth. He made a distinction in the posterity of the patriarch, by confining to the seed of Isaac the blessings which he had promised ; of the twin sons of Isaac, Esau and Jacob, he declared before they were born, that he preferred the younger to the elder, and rejecting Esau he transmitted the blessing through the children of Jacob. In all these limitations God exercised his sovereignty, and executed his own pur- pose according to the election of grace ; and he made still a further limitation with regard to the children of Jacob. For all they who are descended from the patriarch, according to the flesh, are not the children of promise ; all who are of Israel are not truly Israel, or the people of God. The calling of the nation of Israel is, indeed, without repentance ; and, therefore, Israel as a nation, shall yet be gathered; but many individuals who belong to that nation shall perish. " Israel," as the apostle speaks, understanding by that word 51 4G 578 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES all the descendants of Jacob, " hath not obtained that which he seeketh for ; but the election hath obtained it," i. e. those who are elected have obtained it ; a remnant is saved, while the rest were blinded ; and in place of that great body of Israelites, who thus appear by the event not to have been elected, God hath called a people which before were not his people ; he is made manifest by the Gospel to them that asked not after him, and through the fall of a great part of Israel, salvation is come to the Gentiles. To all the objections which human reason can suggest against this dispensation, the answer made by the apostle is conveyed in this question, " who art thou that repliest against God?" He represents by a striking similitude, the condition of the creatures as entirely at the disposal of him who made them : and he concludes all his reasoning in these words, Rom. xi. 33 — 36, " 0 the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God ! how unsearchable are his judg- ments, and his ways past finding out ! For who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again ? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things ; to whom be glory for ever, Amen." In these verses, the very principles which are the foundation of Calvinism are laid down by an inspired apostle, and applied by him to account for this fact, that of a nation, who are chosen by God, many individuals perish ; and the account which they furnish is this, that under the declared purpose of calling the whole nation to the knowledge of the truth, there was a secret pur- pose respecting individuals, which secret purpose stands in the salva- tion of some and the destruction of others ; while the declared purpose stands also respecting the whole nation. If these principles apply to the peculiar people of God under the Mosaic dispensation, they may be applied also to Christians, who, by enjoying the gospel, come in place of that peculiar people, and are so designed in Scripture : and the apostle seems to teach us by his reasoning with regard to Israel, that we have not attained his full meaning, when we interpret what he says concerning the predestination of Christians merely of those outward privileges, which being common to all are abused by many ; but that with regard to them, as with regard to Israel, there is a pur- pose of election according to grace which shall stand, because they who are elected shall obtain the end which all profess to seek, while the rest are blinded. According to this method of interpreting these two chapters, we learn from the apostle that there is the same sovereignty, — the same exercise of the good pleasure of God in the election of individuals as in the illumination of nations, that both are accounted for upon the same principles, and that with respect to both, God silences all who say that there is unrighteousness in him by that declaration, which he employed when he conferred a signal mark of his favour upon Moses, " I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion upon whom I will have com- passion." 3. There are passages both in the Epistles and in other parts of Scripture, which appear to declare the election of some individuals and the reprobation of others, without any regard to the nations to which they belong. I do not mean that there are passages of this TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 579 kind, the application of which in support of the Calvinistic system has not been controverted; for upon a subject which the Scriptures have left involved in much obscurity, and upon which they have chosen rather to furnish incidental hints than a complete delineation, it is easy for ingenious men to give a plausible exposition of particular texts, so as to accommodate them to their own system, I do not con- sider that all the texts which are quoted in support of the Calvinistic system admit, according to the rules of sound and fair criticism, of that interpretation which is adopted by those who quote them : nor do I mean to hold forth as insignificant the objections made to the Calvin- istic interpretation of the texts which I arn now to mention. But I arrange them under this third head, because it appears to me that the interpretation connected with that arrangement is the most natural, and that when taken in conjunction with the other support which the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture, they contain an argument of real weight. 1. Our Lord calls the Christians sx\ixtoi, Matth. xxiv. 22, 24, and Luke xviii. 7, when this name does not seem to have any reference to the purpose of calling the Gentiles, or to the election of his apos- tles to their office. The name is given to those Jews who had embraced the gospel before the destruction of Jerusalem. They were distinguished from their countrymen by their faith in Christ ; and on account of this distinction were permitted to escape that destruction which overtook all the rest of their nation. Now the faith of these Christian Jews is represented by the name sxXBxifov, a word which here can have no reference to the distinction between Jews and Gentildfe, but seems employed on purpose to remind them that their faith flowed, not from any exertion of their own, but from the good pleasure and appointment of God, who chose them out from amongst their coun- trymen. 2. Our Lord comprehends his true disciples, all who are to be saved by him, under this general expression, John vi. 37, 39,nav 6 SsBo^xs or StScddt ^01 o rtafj;^. He applies, indeed, in John xvii. the phrase oij SsSoixa^ jwot, to all the twelve apostles, not excluding Judas ; so that their being given him by God means nothing more in that place than the phrase used John XV. 16, ovx vy-ei^s ^s c^eXs^aUdi, iX-k'' syoi vaas c^iXc^aufjv ', their designation and election to the office of Apostles, without any respect to their personal character or to their own salvation. But when the two chapters are compared, it is instantly perceived that the same phrase is used in different senses ; because it is said, John vi. 39, " this is the Father's will, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing ;" whereas it is said, John xvii. 12, " those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition." Our Lord's expression in chap. vi. being thus clearly discriminated from the similar expression in chap. xvii. seems to im- ply that the infallible salvation of all true Christians arise, from the destination of God. 3. Acts viii. 48. Kk' tftoatsvsav bsoi, rjiav 'tstayju-fvoi. tcy ^iorjv aiuviov. All who oppose the Calvinistic system understand tctayuivoi to mean no- thing more than the English word disposed, /. e. persons who had prepared themselves, who were qualified by the disposition of their minds for eternal hfe. But this use of the word is neither agreeable to 580 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES its primary meaning, nor supported by any authority. The word pro- perly means set in order for eternal life ; and the ordering is marked, by the passive voice, as proceeding from some other being. So the powers that are, Rom. xiii. 1, by which the apostle means civil au- thority, 'i'rto fovGfov rfifayftEmtftct. 'Offotis manifestly a partitive of the Gentiles, all of whom had heard the same discourse preached by Paul and Barnabas in the synagogue of Antioch, and all of whom had re- joiced in hearing it ; and the clause appears intended to account for its producing an effect upon some, of more permanent and substan- tial value than the gladness which it had produced in all. The ac- count given is the destination of God, who, having meant to bring some of them to eternal life, set them in order for that end, by giving them faith. 4. There is one passage in the epistle to the Romans, where the apostle uses the words rt^oogi^