<--< -}}&&&&$$$:::。≡****§§ ################# -·33-№ž ğ׿§§§§§§##########ſºț¢ ¿??-******#！*®## §§§* ¿ Ģ##############§§- §§§§§§§§·ºg sae;ğț¢&&-*- §*** ###################ģțğË ######ţ#####§§####¿ - --►≡-…-- ·---- š-№-，§§¿ ¿¿?≡ ≈≠≤· ¿·ſae;ºrºsº·§§§§- m- §§:¿§§№ſſae™� ： ：ç.}، §§，，…§§#¿?· șițğĒģ§§§§¶√∞;¿ §§§≡¿¿ {∞ √∞， -∞， ----ºſºſaeœ----§§§§§§§§§·：·|-、、、。、、。¿ ¿ģ§§¿§§§§§§§§§§§§§§∞ §§¿?。 ¿§§§§∞B-..………，-3，…ſ. ***·0§§§* №ºaeºggiº-gaerae，¿ … :~~~~，§§§§§§§~§§|¿¿Ēģķēģğţ ،|§§：¿。¿§§§§§§§§§§§ğğ） ĒģËğ §ț¢ ț¢m §§ §§§ §§ ¿-✉ ----šį§，§§§§§§§§§ ！ſae。ğ،¿§§§），ae §§|ק§、、。、 §§Ë：،§§- **…*$§;、。·§§§§§§&&✉§§§§§1.§§ ſae;… ·§§§©®£§!!!$$¿§§§§ĢģĞğșae~ w ….….：…，，.，：.，.¿ ：-：§§， №ſſaeºſ;§§§¿§§§§§§2;¿¿|-|-§§ ·¿ſy§§:};§§§§§§§¡¿§§§;&#ffaeſ;·！¿ Proffer, Rev. Dr. Prebendary of Durham, Io copies Proffer, Mrs. Io copies Provis, Rev. William, Wickham Pye, Rev. H. A. Pytts, Jonathan, Eſq. Kyre, Worceſterſhire Pytts, Mrs. - Queen's College Library [ xviii ) R. Racket, Rev. J. Spetiſbury, Dorſet Radnor, Right Hon. the Earl of, 5 copies Raikes, Thomas, Eſq. Raikes, Mrs. Raynsford, Mrs. Elizabeth * Rennell, Rev. Dr. Dean of Wincheſter, 20 copies Rice, , Eſq. King's Bench Walk, Temple - Richards, Rev. Dr. Rećtor of Exeter College, 6 copies Richards, Richard, Eſq. Lincoln’s Inn, 5 copies Richards, Rev. Mr. Bampton, Oxfordſhire Richards, R. S. Eſq. Richards, Mrs. Dorcheſter, Dorſet Riddel, Sir James, Bart. Chriſt-Church, 3 copies Roberts, Tho. Eſq. Charter Houſe Square Roberts, Mrs. T. . Roberts, Miſs Robertſon, Rev. Mr. Savilian Profeſſor of Geometry, 3 copies Rocheſter Chapter Library, 5 copies - Rocheſter, Right Rev. the Lord Biſhop of, 1o copies Rocke, Rev. John, Shrewſbury Rogers, W. L. Eſq. Lincoln's Inn Rogers, Rev. Mr. Wadham College Romney, Right Hon. the Earl of, 3 copies Roſdew, Rev. Mr. Exeter College Roſe, Right Hon. George, M. P. 2 copies Round, James, Eſq. Birch Hall, Eſſex Round, John, Eſq. Colcheſter Round, John, Jun. Eſq. Balliol College Routh, Rev. Dr. Prefident of Magdalen College, 5 copies Rowe, Captain, R. M. -- Rowland, Rev. W. G. Shrewſbury Ruſſel, Rev. T. Canon of Hereford, 2 copies Ruſſel, W. Eſq. Brauncepeth Caſtle, Durham Ruſſel, Mr. Magdalen College S. Saliſbury, the Dean and Chapter of, 1o copies Scobell, Rev. Mr. Balliol College [ xix J Scott, Right Hon. Sir William, M. P. Io copies Selwood, Robert, Eſq. 6 copies Shaftoe, Mrs. M. Shorland, Rev. Mr. Rećtor of Martyr Worthy Short, Rev. W. Rećtor of Kingsworthy, 2 copies Sidmouth, Right Hon. Lord Viſcount, 12 copies Simeon, Edward, Eſq. Siſſmore, Rev. Mr. Fellow of Wincheſter College, Io copies Slade, Rev. Samuel Slaney, Rev. Richard, Vicar of Penkridge, Staffordſhire Small, Rev. Dr. Briſtol Smith, Rev. Robert, New College Southouſe, Mrs. Myra, Lamb's Conduit-Street Spencer, Right Hon. Earl, 5 copies Spencer, Right Hon. Lord Charles, 2 copies Spencer, Right Hon. Lady Elizabeth Spencer, John, Eſq. St. Aſaph, Right Rev. the Lord Biſhop of St. David's, Right Rev. the Lord Biſhop of, 1o copies Stalman, Rev. William, Rećtor of Stoke Bruern, Northamp- tonſhire, 2 copies Steele, Rev. R. Stevenſon, Rev. G. Biſhop-Wearmouth Stonard, Rev. Mr. º Sturges, Rev. Dr. Chancellor of the Dioceſe of Wincheſter, 5 copies Sutton, Mrs. New Park, Wilts, 5 copies Sutton, Robert, Eſq. Artillery Place, Finſbury Square Symons, Rev. J. Rećtor of Whitburne, Durham Swanton, Rev. F. W. T. Tate, Rev. Mr. Magdalen College Taunton, Rev. R. C. Rećtor of Aſhby Taunton, William Elias, Eſq. Temple Taylor, Dr. Reading, Berks Taylor, Charles, Lieut. Col. 20th Light Dragoons Taylor, Rev. H. Spridlington, Lincolnſhire b 2 [ xx i Temple, Right Hon. Counteſs, 3 copies Thomas, Rev. Matthew, Sutton Lodge, Surrey Tew, Rev. Mr. Vice-Provoſt of Eton College Thompſon, Thomas, Eſq. Temple Thorp, Rev. Dr. Archdeacon of Northumberland Thorp, Charles, Eſq. Univerſity College Thurlow, Rev. Mr. Prebendary of Norwich, 5 copies Thurſby, Rev. George, Cound Lodge, Shropſhire Timbrel, W. Hall, Eſq. Toghill, Rev. Moſes, Canon Refidentiary of Chicheſter Tournay, Rev. Dr. Warden of Wadham College, 5 copies Townſhend, Rev. Mr. Bray Tracey, Hanbury, Eſq. 5 copies Trenchard, Rev. Dr. Trenchard, William, Eſq. Trollope, Mrs. St. Gil s's, Io copies Truſtees of the Eſtates of Lord Crewe, Bamburgh Caſtle, 3o copies Tubb, -—, Eſq. Tanfield Court, Temple Turner, Samuel, Jun. Eſq., Tutte, Rev. Mr. 3 copies V. Vanſittart, Rt. Hon. Nicholas, M. P. 5 copies Vanfittart, Major General, 2 copies Vaughan, Right Hon. Lady Mallet Vaughan, Rev. Mr. Merton College Vinicombe, Rev. Mr. Pembroke College Vivian, J. Eſq. Tanfield Court, Temple W. Wadham College Library Walker, Rev. Mr. New College Walker, Rev. William, Chicheſter Wall, Dr. New College, 10 copies Walters, Rev. Charles Walters, Rev. Mr. [ xxi ) Warne, Mr. Weymouth, 2 copies Warner, D. H. Lee, Eſq. Bath Waſey, Rev. Mr. All Souls College Webb, Daniel James, Eſq. 6 copies Webber, Rev. Charles, Canon Refidentiary of Chicheſter, 2 copies Webber, Rev. Mr. Chriſt-Church, 3 copies Wegg, George Samuel, Eſq. Aćton, Middleſex, Io copies Wegg, Miſs, Io copies Wetherell, Rev. Dr. Dean of Hereford, and Maſter of Uni- verſity College, Io copies Wetherell, Charles, Eſq. Lincoln's Inn Wetherell, Rev. Mr. New College White, Rev. Dr. Canon of Chriſt-Church, Io copies White, Rev. John, New College White, George, Eſq. Newington, Oxfordſhire Whitmore, John, Eſq. Wickens, Rev. J. Mapperton, Dorſet Wickham, Rev. T. Wilberforce, William, Eſq. M. P. 5 copies Wild, Mrs. 3 copies Wilde, Rev. J. Onſlow, Shropſhire Willes, Rev. W. Shippen, 5 copies Willes, Mrs. W. Williams, Dr. Corpus Chriſti College Williams, Mr. C. New College Williams, Mr. D. New College Williams, Mr. P. New College Williams, Rev. Mr. Fellow of Wincheſter College Williams, Mrs. Williamſon, Robert Hopper, Eſq. Newcaſtle on Tyne Wills, Rev. Dr. late Warden of Wadham College, Io copies’ Wilſon, Rev. Mr. St. Edmund Hall z Wincheſter, Rev. the Dean and Chapter of, 50 copies Wincheſter College Library, 20 copies Windſor Chapter Library Wingfield, Rev. John, Shrewſbury Wintle, Rev. Mr. Brightwell, 5 copies Wither, Lovelace Bigg, Eſq. Manydown, 5 copies [ xxii J Wodehouſe, John, Eſq. Ludlow Woods, J. Eſq. Chilgrove, near Chicheſter Woods, E. Eſq. Shopwick, near Chicheſter Wood, Robert Serrell, Eſq. Oſmington, Dorſet, 6 copies Wood, Mrs. Oſmington, 6 copies Wood, Rev. Robert Serrell Wood, Mrs. Robert Wood, Miſs Wood, Miſs Elizabeth Wood, Rev. Mr. Chriſt-Church, 3 copies Woodcock, Rev. F. Prebendary of Hereford Wool, Rev. Mr. Midhurſt, Suſſex Woolcombe, Rev. Mr. Oriel College Worceſter, Right Rev. the Lord Biſhop of, Io copies Worceſter Chapter Library Worſley, Rev. James, Billingham Wray, Rev. Sir William, Bart. Darley Dale, Derbyſhire, 5 copies Wright, J. Atkyns, Eſq. M. P. Io copies Wright, Rev. Dr. Rector of Whitechapel Wright, Rev. John, Rećtor of Great Billing, Northampton- ſhire Wyndham, Rev. I. H. Wadham College Y. York, His Grace the Lord Archbiſhop of, 1o copies Yorke, Thomas Henry, Eſq. Univerſity College Z. Zouch, Rev. Dr. Prebendary of Durham CONTENTS. I. OF the Principle of Religion, as a Teſt of Divine Authority; in two Parts. Page 1–98. II. On the Faëls of Revelation ; in two Parts. Page 99.-147. III. On the Angelical Meſſage to the Wirgin Mary. Page 149.—180. IV. On the Prophecies and Teſtimony of John the Baptiſt, and the Parallel Prophecies of Jeſus Chriſt ; in three Parts. Page 181.—362. V. On the Principle of Redemption, whether Pre- mial, or Penal; in two Parts. Page 363.−398. VI. On xxiv. CONTENTS. VI. On the Reſurrection of Chriſt, and of the Body. Page 399–423. VII. The Reſurre&tion of the Body deduced from the I?eſurrečtion of Chriſt, and illuſtrated from his Transfiguration; a Diſcourſe. Page 425.—456. VIII. On Humility; a Diſcourſe. Page 457.—475. OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELIGION, AS A TEST OF DIVINE AUTHORITY. O P T H E PRINCIPLE O F R E L I G. I O N. D A R T I. S E CT I O N I. In what light the Divine Being muſt appear to man—deſign of this Treatiſe—nature, differ- emce, and real exiſtence of the religious prin- ciples here conſidered. UNDER what diſpoſition Infinite Power may aćt towards man, is of all queſtions the moſt in- tereſting to him, ſince it may ſubject him to the utmoſt evil he can poſſibly undergo, or vouch- ſafe more good to him than he is able to de- ſerve. Hence the Divine Being naturally and invariably becomes to mankind an object either of fear or love; and the one or other of theſe principles will form the foundation and character of Religion. B 2 But 4 Of the Principle of Religion. But to repreſent God as an objećt of human fear or love, ſeems alſo virtually to repreſent mankind in actual poſſeſſion of ſome unqueſtion- able aſſurance of divine indignation or favour. And this is juſtified by appearances in the con- ſtitution of human nature. Men not only prefer right to wrong, as ſuch, whenever they are ca- pable of perceiving either, but alſo feel pleaſure or pain, hope or fear, and conſider themſelves as objects of divine favour or wrath, in proportion as they are conſcious of the predominance of right or wrong in their characters. A faculty of this caſt, by whatever name it may be called, ſeems evidently affigned by the Supreme Moral Governor, not only as an inform- ing rule of human duty in the preſent ſtate of diſcipline, but it alſo appears his inſtrument as a principle both of reward and of puniſhmenta. For it introduces into the heart of every individual a ſure preſage that the ultimate ſentence of God upon his condućt will juſtly and actually con- form to, and conſequently ratify, that judgment, which his own moral underſtanding paſſes upon it now. And as this preſentiment of final doom * I John iv. 18. p300; 4.6xxow ºxes. Diri conſcia facti Mens habet attonitos, et ſurdo verbere caedit, Occultum quatiente animo tortore flagellum. Juv. Sat. xiii. 193. Dat poenas, quiſquis expe&tat ; quiſquis autem meruit, expečtat. Senec. Ep. Ioff. See Wilkins's Nat. Rel, p. 386. a CCOIIl- of the Principle of Religion. 5 accompanies the preſent judgment of man upon his own actions, the pains and pleaſures of the moral faculty appear in the nature of reward and puniſhment, and in them that retribution ſeems to commence now, which God will complete here- after. - Thus then, the Divine Being is rendered the object of fear or love, by that light in which he ſtands of a moral and righteous Judge, who, be- cauſe he abhors and will puniſh iniquity, and loves and will reward virtue, has aſſured them reſpectively of his wrath or favour. For with what reaſon could moral creatures, as ſuch, fear or love him, if he really ſeemed indifferent to vice and virtue, and had given no ſure intimation that he hated and would puniſh one of them, and that he loved and would reward the other * Indeed, the Divine Moral Government b of the rational creation by ſanctions of reward and pu- niſhment preſent and future, as it may eaſily be * After enumerating the vices of the Gentiles, St. Paul repreſents them as “knowing the judgment of God, that they which do ſuch “ things are worthy of death." And among the Gentiles there are teſtimonies to the truth of his remark. Plato, Opp. p. 6oo. 'o giv 3% Osos, &c. and pag. 4oo, and 776. Condemned perſons were ſaid by the Greeks zigzvyota Sai. Artemidor. ii. 3. So alſo by the Latins, — Quam Fulmine juſto Et Capito et Numitor ruerint. - Juv. Sat. viii. 92. Meurſ. Lycoph. 380. Their mythology repreſents Nemeſis under different but all intimate relations to the Supreme, as the nurſe, the concubine, or the daughter of Jove. Callim. Hym, in Jov. et in Dian. 232. B 3 aſcer- 6 Of the Principle of Religion. aſcertained from the Scriptures, ſo may it be at- teſted by an aſſignable operation upon the human mind in every age. And as far as the hope of indemnity from the penal effects of iniquity, or the apprehenſion of puniſhment reſulting from the conſciouſneſs of ſin, can be traced by their reſpective influences upon mankind, ſo far it will be found that the love or the fear of God, as an objećt, maintained a ruling effect, as a religious principle; and every change introduced at any time, or by any cauſes in Religion, will be ob- ſerved to have caſt out or replaced more or leſs of the one or the other principle. As far, then, as their effects in forming the foundation and character of Religion, at any time, may be aſſignable, ſo far it ſeems that they may be applied as teſts of truth and divine au- thority. This will here be attempted; and to avoid anticipating impreſſions, which the preſent en- quiry may occaſionally leave upon the mind of the reader, it will be ſufficient to obſerve gene- rally, that to fix the characteriſtical principle of Religion, and to ſhew upon what preciſe view of the Divine Being it was at different times founded, is the deſign of this treatiſe. One previous notice, however, is indiſpenſably requiſite. There is a certain ſenſe, in which the love and fear of God, as an object, may be con- ſiſtent. Love and reverence, affection and awe, may combine in one ſenſation, of exquiſite inte- reſt of the Principle of Religion. 7 reſt indeed, yet of no painful diſquiet. But theſe pages reſpect a mere natural dread of Omnipo- tence, preſenting the arm of vengeance lifted up, and ready to deſcend. With that fear of God, in which the love of him, or of wiſdom, or of virtue, begin and advance, they have no con- cern ; but with that only, which turns upon God the eyes of averſion, and diſcerns in him no- thing but hoſtility and wrath, in man nothing but the ſlave of ſin, and the vićtim of puniſh- ment. Of the reality of its exiſtence under this charaćter, aſſurance may be had from the words of the Jewiſh ſage; “wickedneſs, condemned by “her own witneſs, is very timorous, and being “preſſed with conſcience always forecaſteth “grievous things;” and from thoſe of St. Paul; “there remaineth—a certain fearful looking for “ of judgment and fiery indignation which ſhall “ devour the adverſaries.” Of ſuch an impreſſion, the love of God, as an objećt, will here be treated not as the aſſociate but the oppoſite principle. From the love of him directly flows peace and aſſurance of mind; but fear of him, in this ſenſe, tends only to the produćtion of turbulence and diſtruſt. The Apo- ſtle John contraſts them ; “fear hath torment— “ he that feareth is not made perfect in love— “ perfect love caſteth out fear.” And the reverſe of his remark holds equally true. B 4 SECTION 8 Of the Principle of Religion. S E C T I O N II. The perfection of the religious principle in the earlieſt ſtate of Religion—that ſtate archetypal —Apoſtolical charaćters of its reſtoration — what the religious principle is, when Religion is moſt perfect. THE nature of the two principles, under pre- ſent confideration, being thus fixed and ex- plained, views of their operation at different times will be requiſite to ſhew on what ground, in what caſe, and in what circumſtances, they ei- ther ſtood ſingle, or ſucceeded each other, as fundamental principles of Religion. Let us begin then with a view of Religion in its earlieſt ſtate. - On the original condition of human nature the minds of men in all ages have dwelt with admiration and regret. For what duration of time the firſt parents of mankind preſerved that ſtate of innocence, in which they were originally placed by the Creator, is uncertain. It ſeems, however, that they, like other works of the Di- vine Artificer, ſubſiſted for ſome length of time “very good.” From ſeveral paſſages of Holy Scripture, and among them from the Apoſtolical alluſion, “the new man, after God, is created in “righteouſneſs and true holineſs,” the moral upright- Of the Principle of Religion. Q uprightneſs of that primaeval condition may be preſumed. In ſuch a ſtate of human nature the principle of Religion ſeems eaſily affignable. With the reſemblance of divine holineſs the ſimilitude of divine happineſs apparently coincided. For in ſuch circumſtances, as man was free from the conſciouſneſs of ſin, no views of divine diſappro- bation had opened upon his mind. The firſt conſideration of himſelf and of all created things would aſcertain the univerſal intereſt of nature in the kindneſs of God; and experience would juſtify a preſumption, that the ſame infinite power and infinite goodneſs, which had been exerted in the produćtion of general happineſs, would alſo concur in ſupporting it. Under this impreſſion, a thankful acknowledgment of the precious gift of virtuous and happy exiſtence would ſingly fill and poſſeſs the human heart. The hope of good continually gained ſtrength, evil. Hence, during the perfect ſtate of Religion and of nature, it ſeems that love towards God may be juſtly reputed the fundamental and characteriſti- cal principle of Religion. The perfection, then, of the religious principle apparently coincides with the original perfections of human nature. Whilſt the image of God con- tinued in man, as at the firſt, unfullied, there was nothing to prevent his heart from continuing un- der 1 O. Of the Principle of Religion. der the influence of a principle, which is itſelf divine. “God is love;” and as it is the moſt noble attribute of his nature, ſo it is the moſt ex- cellent conſtituent and capital characteriſtic of rational ſervices to him. It is now on earth the commencing ſpark of that holy flame which Re- ligion will kindle, when adjuſted completely to the divine intention, and perfected in ſpirit and in truth hereafter in heaven. The manifeſtation of himſelf under no other character, but that of amiable benevolence, to rational beings meriting and returning his love, was the deſign of God in creation; and when placed in another light, to reeſtabliſh that in which he once appeared, and in which he again wiſhed to look upon man, was his purpoſe in re- demption. As far, then, as Religion really has its foundation in the principle of love towards God, ſo far at all times it will ſeem adjuſted to divine and human perfections, and ſo far there will be evidence of its correſpondence with his primary intention, and of its truth. The fundamental principle and charaćter of Religion at its firſt eſtabliſhment exhibits that archetype, of which every ſubſequent proviſional diſpenſation, of divine authority, was calculated to reſtore the partial or complete ſimilitude. Ac- cordingly, when that reſemblance was reſtored, the reeſtabliſhment of the perfect principle of Religion is aſſerted by the Apoſtle; “for we “ have not received the ſpirit of fear, but the “ ſpirit Of the Principle of Religion. } | “ſpirit—of love;” and both are contraſted, and the perfection of the one and imperfection of the other ſtated at ſome length in a paſſage before referred to ; “herein is our love made perfect, “ that we may have boldneſs in the day of judg- “ment”—“ there is no fear in love, but perfect “love caſteth out fear—becauſe fear hath tor- “ment, x6xaaw, puniſhment; he that feareth is “ not made perfect in love.” * By the degree of perfection, then, in the cha- raēteriſtical principle, we may judge, it ſeems, upon good ground, of the degree of perfection in Religion, under any ſtate of it; and it appears to correſpond completely with the excellencies of the divine and human nature only when it is founded upon love towards God. SEC Tºº O N III. The change in the human character—the light in which the Divine Being thereupon appeared— ſuppoſed reſult of an appeal to reaſon—the change of the religious principle on the new re- lation between the Divine Being and man. UPON this footing the caſe flood, before a fa- tal revolution had enſued in the ſtate of man. But the endearing relation, eſtabliſhed at firſt be- tween God and mankind, was miſerably reverſed by 12 Of the Principle of Religion. by ſin. And ſince love towards God had ſingly operated as the religious principle during the continuance of human innocence, it ſeems that any altcration for the worſe in the moral charac- ter of man would be followed by a correſpond- ent change in the principle of Religion. Human righteouſneſs and love towards God, having ſub- ſiſted in union, would be likely to fail alſo toge- ther; and when contrary circumſtances, as con- ſciouſneſs of ſin and of divine anger incurred thereby, took place on the part of man, the reli- gious principle, if Religion kept any ground, would alſo be ſupplanted by one of a contrary caſt. From oppoſite cauſes there would enſue oppoſite effects. As it is only with the conſci- ouſneſs of virtuous chara&ter, and with the aſ- ſurance of the human heart before God, that love towards him can be compatible, ſo when ſin en- tered into the world, the fear of God would ne- ceſſarily follow. In the ſpontaneous effuſion of gratitude for benefits received, the foundation of divine wor- ſhip has been frequently laid. It appears indeed with ſufficient reaſon; but they, who have ad- vanced this opinion, ſeem right in the principle they adopt, but wrong in the place they aſſign it. When nothing except good had been re- ceived or was expected from God, he muſt have been the object of grateful and affectionate ado- ration. The impreſſion of his threatenings could hardly go ſo deep, as to eradicate the endearing ſenſe Of the Principle of Religion. 13 ſenſe of his uninterrupted beneficence. But the ſame caſe can ſcarcely be preſumed to hold in circumſtances the reverſe of theſe. A ſenſe or an expectation of penal evil would eſtabliſh an- other intereſt in the heart. The Divine Being, who before had been only loved as a friend, would then be dreaded as an avenger; and Reli- gion will invariably correſpond with all parts of the known relation between God and mankind. Thus, upon the fall of man, the view in which the Deity appeared was new. The endearing impreſſions of divine favour, which would have remained upon the mind, if guilt had not been incurred, were obliterated by diſtreſsful views of divine diſpleaſure. If God, before the fall, had been loved from his manifeſt diſpoſition to bleſs, he was feared, after it, from his expected coming to puniſh. And whatever might be the delay of his dreaded vengeance, ſtill the ſinner foreboded it as ſure. This repreſentation appears authenti- cated by the language of our firſt father to his Judge, “I heard thy voice in the garden, and I “ was afraid becauſe I was naked, and I hid my- “ ſelf.” In the condućt and apparent feelings of their progenitor, his deſcendants of every age may deſcry their own. Such are the indelible characters of fallen nature when left to herſelf, betrayed, as we may find upon inſpection, more or leſs diſtinctly by the moral and religious hiſ. tory of mankind. If man, when fallen from original uprightneſs, applied 1 4 Of the Principle of Religion. -- applied to Reaſon for an eſtimate of his condi- tion, there appears no ſufficient ground for ſup- 'poſing he would obtain any real relief from that intereſting enquiry. What might be known from divine Revelation, is not here the queſtion; from the diſciples of nature only the proper an- ſwer muſt come ; and if it is built upon nothing beyond the extent of natural knowledge, and yet is ſtrićtly adjuſted to all natural feelings, it may be perhaps thus aſſigned. By an eſtabliſhed law, operating in the conſtitution of man as well as in the conſtitution of nature, ſinners invariably ſuf- fered either inwardly or outwardly, or in both reſpects, for the evil of their condućt. Theſe ap- pearances aſcertained the part which God took againſt them ; and as moral degeneracy gained ground in the human nature, an aggravation of the divine hoſtility muſt be expected to enſue. It ſeems not eaſy to conceive any other reſult of an appeal to reaſon. It directed, indeed, to duty, and convinced men that ſin reigned in the human character, with the probability of becom- ing “more exceeding ſinful;” it ſaw the truth of the caſe, and muſt dread the conſequence. No ground appears" for a juſt preſumption at the time that the judgment of God might be de- ſerved, and yet be eſcaped. * That the wiſdom and the juſtice of remitting the puniſhment of fin is not diſcoverable by reaſon, has been frequently ſhewn. See Sherlock's Diſc. vol. i. p. 47, &c. Clarke's Ev. of Natural and Re- vealed Religion, and his defender Stebbing, p. 41. A ſen- Of the Principle of Religion. 15 A ſentiment ſo full of terror would hardly fail to take the firmeſt poſſeſſion of the mind, and to fix a correſpondent impreſſion upon every reli- gious effort it made. Love towards God, which had been the principle of religion before the Fall, would loſe its wonted hold, when ſin repreſented the Divine father and friend of man in the al- tered light of a judge and avenger. Love, allied to ſerenity of mind and aſſured hope, would de- cline to aſſociate with turbulence and diſtruſt. The heart would be wholly poſſeſſed by the ſtruggle of remorſe and the preſage of ven- geance. In this ſtate of things, under the conſciouſneſs, of accumulated iniquities, and the “ looking for “ of judgment,” it ſeems evident that fear of God muſt take place as the fundamental or only principle d of religion. A change would hardly fail to enſue in the purpoſe of worſhip. The for- feiture incurred of divine favour would ſuggeſt an earneſt endeavour to deprecate divine wrath. This might be expected; and, according to ap- pearances, it actually engaged the general ſolici- tude of mankind. But although conſcience aſcertained that the favour of God was loſt, yet reaſon could not pre- ſume that ever it would return. As the condi- tion to which men were reduced had been de- * Deo ſatis eſt, quod colitur et amatur—non poteſt Amor cum Timore miſceri. Senec. Ep, 47. • ſerved, 16 Of the Principle of Religion. ſerved, nothing could be pleaded or pretended againſt the juſtice of leaving them in it. And upon the idea that men would perſiſt, as they really did, in adding fin unto fin, their caſe would daily become more and more deſperate. If juſ- tice was confeſſedly an attribute of God, they could ſcarcely expect it would be cancelled by his mercy, of which they were continually grow- ing more unworthy. The fact, then, ſeems to be, that theſe natural and univerſal impreſſions, reſulting from the new relation between the Divine Being and man, of judge and offender, would have a neceſſary ten- dency to exclude love towards God as the prin- ciple of religion, and that this effect would be certain, if nature was left to herſelf. SECTION IV, I/hat became on the Fall the religious principle —in what caſe and by what means reſtrained fin its operation—the divine promiſe—the ſacri- ficial and accepted ſign of faith therein—Abel's ſacrifice—inferences from it. TO verify the character of fallen nature here drawn, and authorize the ſuppoſition that fear of God would conſequently uſurp the place of his love, as the religious principle, it will be requiſite to conſult appearances, both in the religion of thoſe Of the Principle of Religion. 17 thoſe who adhered to the true God, and of thoſe who fell away to Gentile ſuperſtitions. Views of both caſes will ſhew where the conſequence actually was ſuch, and where, and why, it was not. With reſpect, then, to the firſt of theſe two caſes, it may be obſerved, that to reverſe the pe- nal effects of the Fall was the purpoſe of God in his ſcheme of human redemption. It opened im- mediately on the irruption of fin; and when judgment upon the offenders was pronounced, the promiſe of their future deliverance e was given in conjunction with it. As to the degree in which that promiſe was underſtood by the parties to whom it was vouch- ſafed, opinions are different; it appears, how- ever, that the divine purpoſe in giving it muſt have been defeated, unleſs it actually ſuggeſted hopes of deliverance from evils incurred by tranſ- greſſion. If it was ſo far underſtood, an ade- quate proviſion was thereby made for the neceſ- ſity of the caſe. It gave at leaſt ſome notice that the final reſcue of mankind from penal evils, to which they were then ſubjećted, had a place in the divine intention. And however indiſtinctly ſuch an intimation might be apprehended at firſt, it was likely to become more intelligible and more intereſting from incidental circumſtances, * See Shuckford on the Fall, p. 245. Sharpe's ſecond Def. of Ch. p. 6. Sherlock on Proph. Diſc. iii. p. 59, &c. Winder's Hiſt. of F. nowl. p. 26, 27, 42, &c, Lightfoot's Miſcell. Io 23. C that 18 Of the Principle of Religion. that could not at the time eaſily eſcape obſerva- tion. It was obvious to the firſt offenders, that an irreverſible curſe had fallen upon their ene- my ; that they had not been curſed together with the ground; that the Divine Judge inter- poſed in various inſtances with pity and tender- neſs, for their relief and accommodation, and kept up an intercourſe with them, as an inſtruc- tor and protećtor, in many ways, and on fre- quent occaſions. Theſe and other favourable notices f would certainly have ſome effect in con- duéting them on to greater aſſurance of hope. And accordingly it ſeems that a deliverer from the judicial evils of the Fall was expected in the Seed of the Woman g. f Their ſentence in its very tenor implied the delay of the penalty denounced; a ſtanding hoſtility between them and the Tempter— ſorrows to be greatly multiplied in conception—continual toil in pro- curing ſubſiſtence from the ground—embarraſſment from thorns and thiſtles in the livelong cultivation of it—a future poſterity—were things they were taught to expect; and theſe neceſſarily implied that the execution of the ſentence was not immediate but diſtant. Theſe and other circumſtances, taken together with the promiſe of final vićtory over the ſerpent, could hardly fail of ſuggeſting the hope, that God deſigned they ſhould at length regain what they had at pre- ſent loſt. See Winder's Hiſt. of Knowl. p. 4.1, &c. Worthington on Red. ch. iii. p. 63. and compare A&ts xiii. 32. & See Gal. iv. 4. Several of the Interpreters, following the Para- phraſt Jonathan, underſtand the exclamation of Eve, on occaſion of Cain's birth, to imply that ſhe expected the promiſed deliverer in him. See Poole's Synopſis, on the place, and Kennicott's ſecond Diſſert. Compare the words of Lamech, “ This ſame ſhall comfort us,” &c. It ſeems evident that an expectation of this kind was commonly en- Here, tertained. Of the Principle of Religion. 19 Here, then, the Divine Being interpoſed by a real promiſe, ſo far underſtood as to abate that terror of his judgment for ſin, under which na- ture would otherwiſe have laboured without al- leviation. And we cannot ſay how much the frequent refle&tion h of the ſinners themſelves, aſ- fifted as it was by occaſional communications from heaven during a conſiderable interval of time, might contribute further to ſoften that fearful view in which the Divine Judge muſt ap- pear to the mind, when the ſtate of nature at the time was known to be a ſtate of puniſhment. That much reflection was employed upon the promiſe vouchſafed, or much light thrown upon it by divine communication, or both, during a conſiderable length of years, ſeems indeed ex- tremely credible. - For, early in the lifetime k of the firſt man, faith in the promiſe was one of the indiſpenſable * To judge of this any one may be enabled by Winder, Hiſt, of Knowl. Se&t. 2. and Allix, Refle&t. B. i. ch. 8. * The Lord God ſent forth and drove out the man from the gar- den; that is, by divine meſſage or divine appearance ; and if with either, moſt probably not without ſome communications, of a ten- dency to ſupport that hope which the promiſe had given. Divine communications are plainly implied in the whole ſtory of Cain. See Law's Confid. p. 53, &c. Whatever might be the way in which God ſhewed the reſpect he had to Abel's offering, the very intelligibility of it ſeems to imply divine communication either before or then made. That ſuch were not thought uncommon has been concluded from Job vi. Io. xxiii. I2. xxix. 4. xxiii. I 5, 23. k Before the 13 oth year of the world. Both Cain and Abel made oblation, and, as it ſeems, at a ſtated time, and at one place; and both ſeem ſo far to have ačted under the ſame motives of duty, and the C 2 ſame 2O Of the Principle of Religion. requiſites in acceptable worſhip. And even if the right of ſacrifice was, as many have con- tended, the device of Adam, or of his ſons, ſtill, when offered with faith, it was viſibly accompa- nied with an atteſtation of divine acceptance. This of itſelf would have been ſufficient to lay a foundation for ſacrificial oblations by faith to God. But the truth ſeems to be, that faith in the promiſe was of divine requiſition, and a ſa- crifice of blood, as the ſign of it, of divine autho- rity. In all m that has been written reſpecting ſacri- fices, it does not appear proved that they are of ſame ſenſe of a particular direétion when and where they ought to worſhip. In ſome points then they agreed; and ſo far even Cain may be ſaid to have ačted by faith; he came to worſhip God, and wiſhed to do it acceptably. That faith then, in which Abel was ſingle, ſeems not to have related merely to God's exiſtence and pro- vidence, but rather to ſome particular revelation. The promiſe of a Deliverer is the only one that had yet been brought into view. And every revelation, by containing ſome poſitive inſtitution, was an objećt not only of faith as to what God had then declared, but alſo of the “obedience of faith” (Rom. iv. 11.) as to what he had en- joined. God beſtows bleſfings by the uſe of means; and in any caſe where the means are wanting, the bleſfing will be wanting alſo. As to the ground of faith in Abel, ſee the Epiſtle to the Hebr. xi. 13. “Theſe all” (i. e. incluſively from Abel, the firſt, to Sarah, the laſt,) “ died in faith,” &c. It appears not that Abel received any tempo- ral promiſe; moſt probably then his faith had for its ground a pro- miſe of a different caſt. See Kennicott's ſecond Diſſert. Shuckford on the Fall, Pref. p. 16. * See the writers quoted by Whitby on Heb. xi. 4. “ he obtained “witneſs that he was righteous.” * Reſpecting the origin of ſacrifices, ſee Winder's Hiſt. of Knowl. p. 28. Jortin's Serm. vol. vi. p. 35. and particularly Law's Conſid. p. 49, and the ſubſequent pages, with the notes there; and his Life of Chriſt, Of the Principle of Religion. 21 human origin. And if not, every one muſt de- cide between the two diſputed probabilities, by enquiring for himſelf, which of them is moſt fa- voured by the Scriptures. . That God by a ſenſible atteſtation accepted ſa- crifice in the caſe of Abel, and in that of Noah, and approved it ſo often in Abraham, and ſyſte- matically eſtabliſhed it in the law of Moſes, are conſiderations of ſuch weight, that when they are taken together with every other intimation in Scripture, they ſeem to turn the ſcale againſt the preſumption of their human origin. What was the opinion of Moſes in the caſe, ſeems plain from his repreſenting God as preſcribing it to the friends of Job. But to proceed—Abel preſented at the altar “ the firſtlings of his flock, and the fat thereof.” As Moſes received a direction to ſelect the firſt- lings from males only, which diſallows the inter- pretation of Grotius, “wool and the milk there- “ of ;” and as the Writer to the Hebrews con- traſts the blood of Abel's ſacrifice with the blood of Chriſt, preeminently ſtyled “ the blood of “ſprinkling,” and repreſents both as ſpeaking good things in different degrees, it appears that the Hiſtorian and the Epiſtolary Writer attri- buted to Abel an animal ſacrifice. Chriſt, note v. Till after the fall of man external religion is not heard of; nor does it appear that, without warrant from God, to ſlay a beaſt, as Abel did, was a lawful ačtion; it ſeems therefore extremely diffi- cult to ſuppoſe that ſacrifices were the device of man. C 3 “ The 22 Of the Principle of Religion. “The Lord had reſpect unto Abel, and” not only to him but alſo “to his offering,” from whence God is alſo repreſented as “teſtifying of “his gifts.” It ſeems, then, that the phraſe wºxeſoya Svatay directs to a diſtinction between the animal ſacrifice of Abel, and that of Cain which conſiſted of “ the fruits of the ground,” as if the divine acceptance of the firſt had turned upon that difference, as well as upon that faith in which Abel was ſingle. - The “much more ſacrifice n” of Abel, as it is well rendered in Wickliffe's Bible, appears ſig- nally and preeminently marked. And if faith in the promiſe was a requiſite, and even with it all ſacrifices were not indifferent, there was ſome- thing real in the external expreſſion as well as in the inward diſpoſition, and it becomes the greater difficulty to imagine a divine preſcription of the one, and not alſo of the other. The tranſaction, then, when opened in its views, upon the concurrent authority of Moſes and the Writer to the Hebrews, appears to im- ply, that the divine promiſe of deliverance from the penal evils of the Fall was, or might be, at this time, ſo far underſtood, as to make the * Afterwards, in the Bible of Elizabeth, the verſion was, “a greater “ſacrifice.” See Kennicott's ſecond Differt. Shuckford, note, p. IO4. Pref. to Diſc. on the Fall. After Cain's offering, Moſes mentions no oblation of fruits of the ground only, till the giving of the law. There might be ſuch during that interval; but then the only inſtance in which he has mentioned that ſort of ſacrifice, during that period, is in this contraſt of it with an animal one, and then it was rejećted. ground Of the Principle of Religion. 23 ground of faith; and that a ſacrifice of blood was the appointed expreſſion of that faith; and that the juſtification of the penitent worſhipper re- ſulted from the divine acceptance of both. But this point will be purſued ſomewhat further in another place. - S E CT I O N V. The promiſe illuſtrated and confirmed by divine Iłevelation made to Lamech—to Noah, with a limitation to the line of Shem—to Abraham, with a limitation to his own ſeed—to Jacob, with ſeveral particular and ſignal circumſtances —general reception and belief of it. WITH reſpect to the reception and belief of the promiſe, it might be preſumed that frequent communications o with the Divine Being hardly paſſed without throwing additional light upon it. That they did not, however, ſeems evident from the ſubſequent circumſtances. Lamech named his ſon, Noah, ſaying, “ this “ ſame ſhall comfort us concerning the work and * Eſpecially when it is confidered that the children of Seth had ſeparated themſelves from the children of men, (as they are called by way of diſtinétion, Gen. vi. 2.) and maintained ſo much real reli- gion, as to procure themſelves the title of ſons of God. See Shuckford's Conn. B. i. p. 42. Of the effects of the promiſe in the righteous fa- mily of Seth, ſee Law's Conſid. p. 59. C 4 “ toil 24 Of the Principle of Religion. “toil of our hands, becauſe of the ground, which “ the Lord hath curſed.” The paſſage ſeems to admit of two interpretations only. If Lamech expreſſed a mere conjećtural wiſh, even this will imply that one of the human race was generally expected as a deliverer from the judicial effects of the Fall. So much appears abſolutely neceſ- ſary to make a ground for the ſentiment itſelf. But if it was prophetical, it is a clear inſtance of divine interpoſition to elucidate and confirm the promiſe. In either caſe, as much ſeems evident as the argument here requires, that the promiſe of deliverance from the penal inflićtion of the divine Judge was, or might be, ſo far underſtood, as to become a principle of religious faith. To a partial confirmation of the promiſe of deliverance from penal inflićtion for ſin, Noah was a perſonal witneſs. A general diſplay of divine vengeance he had indeed ſeen; but he ſtill ſaw that the accompliſhment of the promiſe was rendered even more credible, by the miraculous interpoſition of its divine Authºr, to preſerve thoſe who might be objects of it. But ſtill fur- ther; he preſented the burnt-offering on the al- tar, and in purſuance of that expiatory ſacrificeP, a removal in part of the original judgment for human tranſgreſſion was expreſsly made the P So Joſephus conſidered it. Antiq. 1. i. c. 4. See Stillingfleet on the Suff of Chriſt, p. 223. and Eſſay on the Nature and Deſign of Sacrif. 231. It was an holocauſt, from which euchariſtical ſacrifices are commonly diſtinguiſhed in Scripture. ground Of the Principle of Religion. 25 ground of covenant with him. The language of the Divine Judge had been, “curſed is the “ground ;” to Noah he reverſed it, “I will not “ again curſe the ground any more.” And in whatever he was ſeen to do for the accommoda- tion and ſettlement of mankind, the eye of faith might behold him preparing the way for the fu- ture completion of his promiſe. Accordingly, it kept poſſeſſion of Noah's mind, and was afterwards prophetically reſtrained by him to the line of Shem q. And this limitation, as it was new, is another evidence of divine in- terpoſition to keep the promiſe in view. Clear and expreſs repetitions of it were made to Abraham F. To him was the Goſpel preached in theſe terms, “in thee ſhall all the nations of the “ earth be bleſſed.” Thus St. Paul aſſerts, and not without the authority of his Lord ; “Abra- “ham rejoiced to ſee my day; he ſaw it, and “ was glad.” And the revelation made to the Patriarch opened alſo a new limitation, “in thy “ ſeed ſhall all the families of the earth be “ bleſſed.” - The ſame promiſe was repeated and confirmed to Iſaac, under the diſtinguiſhing terms of the q That is, to the line of the younger, in preference to that of the elder, although both had been equally dutiful to him. The point is ſet in a clear light by Sherlock on Proph. Diſc. IV. p. 102, &c. r That the circumſtances, as far as they went, in the ſacrifice of Iſaac, the Child of Promiſe, were virtually to him a repetition of the Promiſe, ſee Mede, Diſc. 44, pag. 249. Jortin, Serm. vol. i. p. 33, &c., Univerſal 26 Of the Principle of Religion. Univerſal Bleſſings; and again to Jacob, and by him a prediction of the coming of the Univerſal Redeemer was delivered with a particularity of circumſtances extremely ſignal. Every new light, occaſionally thrown upon the promiſe, would have ſome confiderable effect in giving it a more firm and intereſting poſſeſſion of the religious mind. Accordingly, it is repre- ſented as the common caſe of “ many prophetst “ and righteous men,” that the eye of their faith diſcovered enough of the coming of the promiſed J)eliverer, to raiſe in them an earneſt deſire of beholding it with their eyes of ſenſe. • Gen. xxvi. 4, and xxviii. 14. That charaćteriſtic may be eaſily diſcerned in the ſeveral repetitions of the promiſe; and it was parti- cularly noticed. See Ecclus. xliv. 22. “The bleſfing of all men and “ the covenant.” The three Chaldee Paraphraſts agree with Chriſ- tians in the aim and purport of Jacob's prophecy. See Mede, Diſe. on Gen. xlix. Io. pag. 34. See alſo Newton, Diſc. on Proph. Ed- wards's Texts, vol. iv. p. 1. Sherlock on Proph. Diſc. vi. pag. 146. Sharpe, Argument for Chriſtianity, pag. 6, 7, not. and chap. iv. pag. I 18. How ſtrongly Jacob reſted in this faith appears from Gen. xlviii. 15, 16, 18. As to what the bleſfing promiſed to Abra- ham and Jacob was, ſee Micah vii. 19, 20. * Among theſe the author of the book of Job may be numbered. See chap. xix. 25, 27. SECTION Of the Principle of Religion. 27 SECTION VI. In what light the foregoing circumſtances placed the divine character—this an eveeption to the general caſe of mankind—inferences from the preceding appearances. T HUS, a divine promiſe of deliverance from penal evil, to be effected by the future ſeed of the woman, preſerved the perfect principle of re- ligion, namely, love towards God, from extinc- tion ; and the blood of the ſacrifice was the reli- gious ſign of faith in that promiſe, moſt probably on the authority of divine appointment, but, if not, certainly on the ſanction of divine accept- ance for the juſtification of the ſinner, notified, in one inſtance at leaſt, by a ſenſible teſtimony. Faith was reckoned to the penitent worſhipper for righteouſneſs, and with faith the altar and the burnt-offering were joint conſtituents of ac- ceptable worſhip. - Obvious, then, is the light in which, under ſuch a ſtate of things, the Divine Being would appear. Of his judicial vengeance the deprava- tion of univerſal nature was a fearful memorial ; but of his mercy the promiſe was the ſtanding ſeal. And in proportion to the livelineſs of faith in it, the fear of divine judgment would ſubſide. However dim the eye of faith might be, and however indiſtinct the promiſe, yet enough was - diſcerned, 28 Of the Principle of Religion. diſcerned, enough had been revealed, to alleviate the terror of an Almighty avenger of ſin, by an authenticated expectation of redemption from the penal curſe. .” In whatever degree this view of divine mercy opened upon the mind, in the ſame proportion love towards God, which had been originally the foundation of religion, would reaſſume its place as a fundamental principle in it. Proviſion had been made to recall and re-engage the affec- tion of the human heart, and the means of pro- pitiatory application to God had been fixed, or authorized, by himſelf. Here was a plain exception to the general caſe of mankind. Among the reſt of the world, con- ſciouſneſs of ſin and anticipation of merited pu- niſhment, inſeparable from fallen nature, were not thus reſtrained from that influence of terror upon the mind, to which they were likely to proceed. Thoſe views of the divine chara&ter, which revelation had unfolded, uninſtructed rea- ſon did not diſcern ; and of that relation be- tween God and mankind, which his promiſe au- thenticated, guilt, as future appearances may ſhew, ſeemed ready to deſpair. “Thy counſel “ who hath known, except thou give wiſdom, ‘ and ſend thy Holy Spirit from above For ſo “ the ways of them which lived on the earth “ were reformed, and men were taught the “things which were pleaſing unto thee, and “were ſaved through wiſdom. She preſerved “ the t; Of the Principle of Religion. 29 “ the firſt-formed father of the world, that was “created alone, and brought him out of his << fall.” Theſe circumſtances laid together may per- haps ſupport the ſubſequent concluſions.—In re- ligion, when moſt fully adjuſted to divine and human perfections, that is, when it is true and moſt perfect, love of its divine objećt will be the great and characteriſtical principle. — Of that love, the promiſe of a deliverer from penal evils became on the Fall the only ground—Faith in that promiſe, with a ſacrifice of blood, obtained a ſignal atteſtation of their divine acceptance for juſtification of ſinners. - When the view of this part of the ſubject is reſumed, and carried on in the proper place, it will be ſhewn that the evidence and effect of the promiſe, and the reſult of it, love towards God, received occaſional acceſſions of light and ſup- port from him. SECTION 30 Of the Principle of Religion. S E C T I O N VII. The religious principle, when revelation was re- jected before and after the time of Noah— Sacrifice general—its chief purpoſe when re- ligion was independent of divine revelation— in what light the diſciples of nature viewed the Divine Being. SUCH was the principle and character of re- ligion among thoſe who received the revelation of God. But among the reſt of mankind, who reječted it, conſciouſneſs of ſin and fear of puniſh- ment were left at full liberty to work their utmoſt effects. As all men were finners ſelf- accuſed, judgment was accordingly foreboded by all “unto condemnation.” Diſabled by ſin from looking up to the Divine Being without terror, they gradually withdrew their eyes from him ; and, having wilfully turned from the light that was offered, were judicially loſt and benighted in the darkneſs they had choſen. The apo- ſtate from the true God ſunk into the ſlave of idolatrous ſuperſtition ". But ſtill the fear of di- * On the words of Cicero, de N. D. Lib. ii.-Non enim Philoſophi folum fedetiam majores noſtrireligionem a ſuperſtitione ſeparaverunt, Lomeier, de Luſtrationibus Vet. Gent. makes the following comment; Religionem igitur cultum Dei ex Amore, ſuperſtitionem eorundem Deorum cultum fed ex Metu ſolo, profe&tum effe voluit. Qui qui- dem Metus, rationis expers, animum perturbat, territumque ligat, unde metum ººz, quod ligamentum, Graeci dixerunt. vine Of the Principle of Religion. 31 vine vengeance may be traced by its operation upon his mind. - No exception in this general repreſentation ſeems to be rendered neceſſary by that particular judgment of God, which Noah with his family ſurvived. Idolatry, that prevailed before and in the days of that patriarch, revived ſoon after him *. The deluge made no alteration in the nature of man. The ſame fallen ſtate of the human mind was transferred to the new world by the few who ſurvived the general deſtruction. “Sin reigned from Adam to Moſes,” and conſe- quently the ſame fearful anticipation of puniſh- ment renewed the ſame effects. And as men “refuſed to retain God in their knowledge,” they were delivered up to a reprobate mind; and became full of all unrighteouſneſs; till at length, as if to deliver themſelves from the per- ſecution of conſcience, and reconcile their accu- mulation of ſins with repoſe of mind, they gradually adopted a theology, that palliated and authorized iniquity by the ſanction of divine examplex. “Theſe things haſt thou done, and “I kept filence; thou thoughteſt that I was al- “ together ſuch a one as thyſelf; but I will “reprove thee, and ſet them in order before “ thine eyes.” * Hyde Rel. Vet. Perſ. pag. 58. Eutychii Annal. pag. 56 and 59. Suid. in v. Zipovz. Comp. Joſh. xxiv. I 5. y See Pſalm lix. 21. Plato de Legg. lib. i. 776. Terent. Eunuch. Aćt, III. Sc. 5, Indeed 32 Of the Principle of Religion. Indeed the expedient was vain. Conſcience the ſtanding witneſs of God againſt the guilty, continued to accuſe, and the preſage of im- pending vengeance to alarm. In the worſhip of falſe gods men were unable to ſhake off impreſ- ſions of mind, which had partly occaſioned their deſertion of the true one. With reluctant re- morſe and tormenting fear they worſhipped and trembled. But although the difference was ſo ſignal in the ſtate of thoſe who were or were not diſ- ciples of revelation, in one thing they agreed. To the altar of the true God, or of a falſe one, ſacrifice was brought as the ſtanding expedient of application to him. It had been conſecrated by immemorial uſage, and deſcended from age to age by general tradition. It might have been adopted from the example of Abel in the old world, and that of Noah in the new, and the practice retained, when the riſe of it was for- gotten. However this may be, deprecation of divine wrath by ſacrifice was, apparently, the great end of religious worſhip, when Nature was left without inſtruction to her own ideas of the divine character, and to her own endeavours for relieving herſelf. The fear of divine judgment for ſin, if not abated by a clear and atteſted promiſe of deliver- ance, has indeed a proper tendency to darken more and more the view of God, and to ex- - aſperate Of the Principle of Religion. 33 aſperate the feelings of mankind. We may be therefore the leſs ſurpriſed at the unreſerved aſ- ſertion of the father of Grecian hiſtory, to Osiov way @$oysé Te 2 Tagazºs 7, and at the readineſs with which other diſciples of nature repeat and enforce his ſentiment. Such an unfavourable notion of the Divine Being ſtands in a forward point of view as one of the moſt ſtriking features in the religion of the Gentiles. Whether they adored one ſupreme deity under a variety of re- preſentations, or conſidered their idols as real di- vinities, in either caſe the notion they had of any divine attribute ſeems equally aſſignable. Their ſacrifices would ſcarcely have been ſuch, as to ſeem adapted chiefly to the purpoſe of ſatiating wrath, if they had not looked upon the Divine Being as ill-diſpoſed; and their worſhip would not have appeared euchariſtical in ſo few in- ſtances, and deprecatory in ſo many, if they had not been actuated moſt preſſingly by a fearful an- ticipation of his vengeance. * See Plut. de Herodoti Malign. Cum autem tº 32%ptov et tº §sio, dicerent, Deum ſupremum, divinitatemque mundi moderatricem, intelligebant. Meurſ. ad Lycophr. 1472. Comp. Wiſd. of Sol. xiv. 29. Philoſtr. Vit. Soph. lib. iii. p. 575. ed. Olear. Tacit. Hiſt. lib. i. Non eſſe curae Diis ſecuritatem noſtram, eſſe ultionem. Plu- tarch repreſents the ſuperſtitious man as oiáſzewo, pºw sizz: Siès, sir2: 3: zurnpäg zo. 3A2Cség - and elſewhere ſays, &ndynn zai aizei rºy &raºzſ- goya kai pºiſa Sa rēs $38. P} SECTION 34 Of the Principle of Religion. SECTION VIII. The religious principle among the diſciples of ma- ture exemplified under five heads—ſolicitude to leave no deities unappeaſed—coſtlineſs and profuſion of blood in religious oblations—to evil deities—human ſacrifices—parental ſa- crifices of children. By what proviſion it happened that, after the Fall of man, love towards God preſerved any degree of its wonted operation as a principle of religion, has been already ſeen, and of that caſe ſome further views will occur below. But here, in religion independent of a divine promiſe, we are to inſpect effects of the oppoſite principle, of fear that caſteth out love. Some of the im- preſſions may poſſibly be detected, when ſo ſtrong was the hand that drew them. It may bring them into an eaſier compaſs of view, if they are repreſented under the five ſubſequent heads. - I. A reſtleſs ſolicitude to leave no deities without propitiation had a conſtant and univerſal prevalence. Objects of worſhip were multiplied with the utmoſt degree of extravagance; and whether they were all reputed real deities, or miniſters and mediators only with the Divine Being, Qf the Principle of Religion. 35. Being, ſtill they were worſhipped in relation to him, and in complication with him *. In various nations altars were erected and prieſts conſecrated to ſtrange and foreign gods"; and one comprehenſive invocation e included all the deities of Europe, Aſia, and Libya. It was a popular remark that worſhip was appropriated in Attica d to the gods of every country and every name. When the preciſe object of worſhip could not be aſcertained, it was then directed to the Deity reſpectively e concerned, and an altar was dedicated to the Unknown God, and ſome- times by his name adjuration was made. It ap- pears, then, extremely probable that the Athe- nians, Jaciózipovšegol, as the Apoſtle ſtyled them, exceſſively fearful of the gods, acted under a reluctance that any divine Being ſhould be un- propitiated for the people. The ſame fearful principle induced the ſtranger to worſhip the gods of the country wherein he ſojourned. There * This is the expreſſion of Cudworth, Intell. Syſt. 515. * Gyrald. Syntag. 17. Philoſtrat, lib. vi. • Theophyl. and Grot. on A&t. xvii. 23. Porphyr, de Abſtin. paſſim. Plut. de Orac. defe&t. Millan's Hiſtory of the Propagation of Chriſtianity, vol. ii. chap. 7. . * Ariſtoph. Nub, 3o4. * +3, agoººow'r, Seš. Diog. Laert. in Epimenide. Macrob. iii. 9. Ludov. Viv. ad Aug. de Civ. Dei, cap. 17. Glaſs. Philol. Sac. pag. 1479. Philopatr. (fi fit) Luciani, º, tº dyverº, i, 'ASwais, and the ſame dialogue at the end. Suid. v. Tipazaſzy. CEcumen. on A&ts xvii. 23. gives the inſcription of the altar; ſee alſo Voſſ, de Idololat. lib. i. c. 2. Selden de Diis Syr. Proleg. c. 3. D 2 W’a 3 36 Of the Principle of Religion. was hazard f in the omiſſion of rites, which were the reputed price of their forbearance. It re- mained notwithſtanding incumbent upon him to adore and prefer the gods of his native land, to whom alone, if to any, obligation and gratitude devoted him. But his ſervice to theſe local and occaſional deities would be ſatisfactorily repaid, if it prevented their hoſtility to him. Theſe and other ſimilar appearances have been frequently aſcribed to the changeful and Capricious humour of Gentiliſm, or to the opinion that God was in all things, or to other cauſes. But my hope and endeavour is, to prevent any eye, that may go over theſe pages, from ſtopping among ſecondary and ſubordinate cauſes, and to lead it up to the firſt, and fix it there. If the votaries of Gentiliſm could endure to leave any poſſible means of propitiation untried, or any divine objećt of it unappeaſed, it appears ex- tremely doubtful whether they would have proved ſo inconſtant and deſultory. The ſu- perſtition, the caprice, the reſtleſſneſs, that mark their religious devices, ſeem no more than effects, * Steſichor. Epigr. 87. Edit. Oxon. et Schol. Eurip. Oreſt. 249. Dii- que, Deaeque Omnes, was the language of invocation, Georgic. lib. i. Ne quod numen praetereat, was the comment, Serv. ad loc. Juv. Sat. xiii. 234. Diod. Sicul, lib. xxiii. p. 739, and 756. Plut. de Placit. Phil. lib. i. cap. 6. 2003;áp.svo, 3.5 x2Airès ºra; 22 gaſes. Porphyr. de Abſtin. ii. Sect. 37, 40, 42, repreſents it as the opinion not only of the vulgar but of the philoſophers likewiſe, that all 3alańna. would hurt thoſe that negle&ted their eſtabliſhed offerings. Whitb. Neceſ. of Chriſt, Rev. p. 191. - * of Of the Principle of Religion. 37 of which the cauſe is required. The behaviour of thoſe who ſailed with the prophet Jonah may ſuggeſt it. Each of them, having previouſly called on his own God to ſave them from the tempeſt, awakened the Prophet to call upon the Lord for deliverance. All application to their own deities for ſafety had failed; the danger became deſperate; they made one religious effort more; it was their laſt and only hope; they had recourſe to the God of Jonah. II. Exceſſive coſtlineſs g of religious dedica- tions, and profuſion of blood in ſacrifices, were alſo characteriſtical effects of the ſame fearful principle. Magnificent offerings h loaded the temple; and the ſacred ſhrine was rich in ſplen- did depoſits, the prices of perſonal deliverance, extorted from the trembling votary by the ſenſe of danger. Fear for his ſafety kindled his de- votion ; and, in hope to preſerve his perſon, he promiſed the ſurrender of his ſubſtance, that ſtood next in his affection. This was agreeable to the popular notion that a gift would prevail in appeaſing divine indignation, when ſupplica- tions, not ſo ſupported, might fail. Sacrifices were not only ſumptuous, but extremely ſan- guinary. In the hecatomb animals were ſome- g Of this Cicero complains, ii. Legg. 335. See alſo Plat. Alcib. ii. p. 132. ed. Etwall. Of the popular opinion in this point, the ad- vice of Helenus to Heótor, Il. vi. 9o, &c. is a ſtrong teſtimony. See the note of the Engliſh Tranſlator. * Juv. Sat. xiii. 147. Meurſ, not, ad Lycophr. 77. D 3 times 38 Of the Principle of Religion. times accumulated in numbers far exceeding the etymological extent of the name. The ſacrificial ceremony betrayed the characteriſtical impreſſion of fear; the worſhippers ſurrounded the ſacrifice, ſcreaming out their execrations over it, and paſ- fionately expreſſing the hope they had that their fins would be removed from themſelves, and be collected, together with their curſes, upon the devoted vićtim. III. But to greater extremities they were driven by fear—it forced them to the infringe- ment of natural humanity, and deluged the abominable altar with the blood of men k. Slaves were devoted at Athens', and driven out under i Herod. ii. 39. Plut. de Iſ. et Oſ. Stillingfleet's Suff of Chriſt. 248. Salluſt, ſpeaking of the blood (it was thought human) which Catiline carried round to the conſpirators, goes on, Cum poſt execrationem om- nes deguſtaviſſent, ficuti in ſolennibus ſacris fieri ſolet. Virg. AEn.ii. 130. Quae ſibi quiſque timebat, Unius in miſeri exitium converſa tulere. * Human ſacrifices are attributed to the Thebans, Corinthians, Meſſenians, Temeſſenſes, by Pauſanias; to the Getes by Herod. lib. iv. to the Leucadians by Strabo, lib. x. to the Lacedæmonians by Fulgentius and Theodoret, Serm. vii. to the Athenians by the Schol. Ariſtoph. Plut, et Equit. to the Goths by Jornandes, Rer. Gaetic. cap. v. pag. 19. to the Gauls by Cicero, pro Fonteio, Io. and Caeſar, de B. G. vi. pag. 133. to the Friſii by Scholan. Deſc. Friſ. to the Heruli by Procop. lib. ii. to the Maffilienſes by Petron. Sat. p. 4. and Servius on Æn. iii. to the Romans by Livy, lib. xxii. pag. 394. Schol. on Horat. Ep. ad. Piſon. v. 16. Plin. N. H. lib. iii, cap. 2. to the Britons by Tacitus, Annal. xiv. 13. et de Mor. Germ. 542. Ed. Amſtel. to the Americans by Martyr. de Nov. Orb. decad. iv. cap. 8. to the Phoe- nicians by Philo, de Phoenic. Hiſt. apud Euſeb. P. Ev. iv. 16. * Suid. in v. wiprºpa. Hoffman, in Exp. Feſt, and in v. Oſiris, Mithras. àIl Of the Principle of Religion. 39 an univerſal execration to periſh in ſolitude, as vićtims of expiation for the people. From the age of Egyptian Iſis, Oſiris, Serapis, and of Per- ſian Mithras, down to that of the Roman Jupiter, and even beyond the time of Conſtantine, the direful practice of human ſacrifice prevailed almoſt in every clime and in every age. To ſuch ſacrifices, when voluntary, which ſometimes happened in the perſons of princes, chiefs, or royal virgins, the popular belief attributed ſuper- lative efficacy. They betray the ſtanding opinion of the times, that the angry god, if defrauded of the required oblation, would not avert the im- pending calamity. Such an idea could not fail to ſpread, when often authorized by the expreſs demand and threatening denunciation of the oraclem. The fate of the ſelf-devoted Decii drew from the Roman Orator this ſtrong and pathetic exclamation—“ Quae fuit Deorum n tanta iniqui- “ tas, ut placari populo Romano non poſſent, niſi “viri tales cecidiffent l” There is a very late as well as ſtriking inſtance of the characteriſtical ſpirit from which all ſuch offerings reſulted. Under one of their kings “ Tantão fame Suecia m Liv. Hiſt, lib. v. p. 255. Dion wonders at the report of two men having been ſacrificed at Rome, gre 72p h 2:30xxx xpnas, : as if the oracle ſometimes gave that direétion. Afºlian. V. Hiſt. xi. 28, See Spencer's note on Origen, contra Celſ, lib. i. ed. Cantab. p. 24. * Cic. de Nat. Deor. lib. iii. cap. 6. ° Loccen. Antiq. Goth, l. i. p. 5. See alſo Jortin's Remarks on E. H. vol. v. p. 253. D 4. “ afflićta 40 Of the Principle of Religion. “ afflićta eſt, ut ei vix gravior unquam incubue- “ rit; cives inter ſe diffidentes, cum poenam de- “lićtorum divinam agnoſcerent, primo anno bo- “ves, altero homines, tertio regem ipſum, velut “irae coeleſtis piaculum, ut fibi perſuaſum habe- “bant, Odino immolabant.” IV. The violent influence of religious fear ap- pears further from the adoration of deities con- feſſedly evil P, and of many deified qualities, if the expreſſion may be uſed, invariably hoſtile to man. The cuſtom of ſacrificing to deities of this caſt was of high antiquity, and of general preva- lence. To the evil god of Egypt was offered human blood; and in various parts of Greece the worſhip of evil deities prevailed, with a view either to appeaſe and mitigate them, or to propi- tiate the deity himſelf in the miniſters of his vengeance. Misfortune had her altar at Rome, and malignant things their ſtated adoration. So extravagant is the number of theſe divinities, ſays her Natural Hiſtorian, that diſeaſes and plagues are reckoned amongſt them, and with trembling fear we ſtrive to appeaſe them. P The idols of Canaan, to whom children were ſacrificed, are called in the common verſion of the Old Teſtament “devils,” but in the original “ the deſtroyers.” It is poſſible that they might have been deities confeſſedly evil. The prevalence, however, of offering hulman ſacrifice to ſuch deities is certain. Schol. Ariſtoph. Plut. on the word 2&agºz. Porphyr. de Abſtin. 2, 37, 40, 42. Pauſan. iv. 233. Macrob, i. cap. 7. Olai Mag. Hiſt. Sept. iii. c. 6. and before at p. 32. Cudworth's Intelle&tual Syſtem, 223 and 519. Plin. N. H. lib. ii. c. 7, •. *} From Of the Principle of Religion. 4 + From conſcious guilt and fear of puniſhment reſulted a forwardneſs of mind q to look upon calamities as divine judgments. Thence directly followed an extreme ſolicitude to avert them, if poſſible, by application made, either immediately to the evils themſelves thus deified, or through them to the Divine Being, by whom they were employed. Accordingly, in parts of the world unknown to the ancients, and conſequently not within reach of their example, the rite of human ſacrifice to appeaſe an evil deity has been found to prevail. The attempt to implore the forbear- ance of divinities of this caſt ſuppoſes them aban- doned, as they feared, to their power. They would ſcarcely have entertained ſo urgent a dread of a principle which they thought evil, unleſs they had deſpaired of their intereſt in the favour and protection of that, which they owned to be good. * V. The human mind was driven by fear of the divine avenger of fin to exceſſes greater than theſe. Thoſe nations which Holy Scripture re- preſents as moſt ſignally wicked, it deſcribes alſo as moſt ſignally cruel in religious oblations. The * Juv. Sat. xiii. 230. * Anton. de Solis Hiſt. Mexic. When the Inca was troubled with diſeaſe, the Peruvians ſacrificed ten children ; at his coronation two hundred; and when a father was ſick, his ſon was offered to the Sun, with ſupplication that the Deity would ſpare the father and be ſatiſ- fied with the ſon. D'Acoſt. Hiſt. Ind. lib, v, cap. 19. See Montaigne, Eff, lib. i. c. 19. dependence 42 Of the Principle of Religion. dependence of the latter part of the charaćter upon the former is ſure and natural; “ in whoſe “ hands is miſchief, their right hand alſo is full “ of bribes.” Accordingly, “all abomination, “ which the Lord hateth, have they done unto “ their gods.” In the vallies of Canaan and of Egypt, parents aſſiſted without a pang at the burning of their ſons and daughters, whom they ſacrificed, ſays the inſpired writer, “to devils.” Thus the king of Moab, when the battle was too fore for him, “took his ſon that ſhould have “ reigned in his ſtead, and offered him for a “burnt-offering upon the wall.” The dire ex- ample was followed by moſt nations; and not only in Carthages, inhabited by deſcendants of Canaan, but even in Italy and at Rome, we may inſtance the prevalence of it. * Fragment, Sanchuniath. Euſeb. Praep. Evang, lib. i. c. Io. Plato in Minoe. Plin, lib. xxxvi. cap. 5. Juſtin. lib. xviii. and Philo Bybl. apud Euſeb. P. E. iii. 16. calls it a ſtanding cuſtom, that in public calamities the ruler ſhould ſacrifice the deareſt of his children to the avenging deities. See Grotius on Deuteron. xviii. Io, and Diodor. Sicul, lib. xxiii. p. 739, and 756. They are even ſaid to have made two hundred ſuch vićtims at once. Peſc. Feſtus on Laëtant. Div. Inft. i. cap. 21. Scriptural inſtances of the cuſtom may be found, 2 Chron. xxviii. 3. 2 Kings xvii. 31. and Jerem. vii. 31. xix. 2, 5. Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. xxiii. 37, 39. It was the pračtice in Canaan, before the Iſraelites came thither, Levit. xx. 23. and it laſted till the time of Joſiah, 2 Kings xxiii. Io. It was the pračtice at Rome till the time of Tiberius. Tertul. Apol. cap. 9. SECTION Of the Principle of Religion. 43 S E. CT I O N IX. Reflections on the foregoing appearances—what their apparent principle—the language of Micah vi. 7, charaćteriſtical. How ſtriking appear the foregoing evidences of grievous ſtruggle and alarm, hurrying the hu- man mind from one object of adoration and one ſpecies of ſacrifice to another, at every change enhancing the coſtlineſs or aggravating the cru- elty of religious oblations ! To aſcribe theſe appearances to prieſtly ſubtle- ty, or to oracular preſcription, will ſcarcely ſet aſide the ſuppoſition here made. There was a preeſtabliſhed feeling in the mind, of which it was eaſy to take advantage. The prieſt and the oracle touched the maſter-ſtring of the heart, al- - ready prepared to accord with their views. Had their requiſitions jarred with natural prepoſſeſ- ſions, ſo general an uniſon would ſcarcely have enſued between them. When the public were under ſo ſtrong a diſpoſition to follow, it was an enterpriſe of no uncertain ſucceſs to lead. Concluſions ought, it may be ſaid, to be cau- tiouſly drawn from practices of remote antiquity, ſince, by paſſing through innumerable hands, ſuch are the differences of colouring they have received, that they may ſometimes appear to ad- mit various conſtrućtions. But ſtill, inferences made 4-4 Of the Principle of Religion. made from them may be ſo free and uncon- ftrained, as to carry in themſelves ſufficient evi- dences of truth. - In every attempt from the ſurvey of actions to detect the principle of mind that produced them, the greateſt danger is that of ſtopping among cauſes which are occaſional and acceſſary, with- out aſcending to that which was primary and principal. Such appearances are ſurely of a na- ture beyond what it is ſufficient to call fantaſtic and extravagant, and to reckon as the reſult of no ſtronger cauſe than mere humour, or devout caprice. Some common principle alone, of per- petual and reſiſtleſs urgency, ſeems adequate to the produćtion of effects ſo prevalent, ſo ſump- tuous, ſo inhuman. Gentile ſuperſtition ſeems to form one great ſuperſtrućture, of which fear of divine judgment for ſin lay at the foundation. The perplexing queſtion, which guilty and fearful nature put to herſelf, ran in the words accommodated by the Prophet to the common pračtices of the Gentiles in his time; “Wherewithal ſhall I come before the “Lord, and bow myſelf before the High God “Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, “with calves of a year old * Will the Lord be “pleaſed with thouſands of rams, or with ten “ thouſands of rivers of oil Shall I give my “firſt-born for my tranſgreſſion, the fruit of my “body for the fin of my ſoul?” If nature could have ſuggeſted the anſwer, her diſciples had been at Of the Principle of Religion. 45 at reſt. But, unable to look up to the Divine Being with other eyes than thoſe of guilt, they beheld him ſurrounded with terrors; and parted from that anchor of the ſoul, the hope of his fa- vour, without any known means of recovering it, they drove up and down, and found no haven of repoſe. And it is to be feared that no one, who refuſes all inſtrućtion but what may be derived from na- ture, will find himſelf able to make out his way to religious aſſurance of mind. He may poſſibly have ſome ſucceſs in beating down and cruſhing the ſenſibility of his heart; but if he permits it to feel, it will ſhew him his deſert of puniſh- ment, though not his indemnity. The certainty of deliverance from the penal effects of ſin was authorized at the firſt by the promiſe of God, and cannot be traced by any ap- pearances where that promiſe was unknown or rejected. Nature, on the contrary, ſeems univer- ſally to have left perſonal puniſhment to be dreaded, as the unavoidable conſequence of per- ſonal iniquities. To duty indeed nature directs, and condemns the ſinner in his own judgment and conſcience; but as to deliverance from pu- niſhment in caſe of tranſgreſſion, it is blind and ſilent. Repentance for paſt ſins, in its utmoſt ſtrength, did always, and, according to appear- ances it may be expected, will always coincide with a “fearful looking for of judgment and fiery “indignation,” without a ſpecial promiſe of in- - demnity 46. Of the Principle of Religion. demnity to break that coincidence; and upon rejection of the divine proviſion, when fully re- vealed, for accompliſhing that promiſe, the fear of guilty nature holds unremoved. This is the Apoſtolical argument", and ačtual appearances have been found, upon enquiry, to ſupport it. SECTION X. Apparent ſtruggle of Philoſophers under the ſame conſciouſneſs of ſºn and fear of puniſhment— They and the vulgar incurred different ex- tremes—Atheiſm—charaćter of God not moral —ſimply beneficent—indifference of actions— opinion of neceſſity. THE diſtreſsful view of the divine character, when drawn by nature without aid from revela- tion, and the clear and forward light which fear of judgment for fin will aſſume without a divine promiſe of redemption, have been ſhewn from the general practices and religious extravagancies of the Gentiles. And in detecting the agency of a principle ſuppoſed to be natural, the proper and direct appeal lies rather to the bulk of man- kind, than to particular ſages, or ſchools. Philo- ſophy might indeed mark that fear of divine judgment, which has been here exemplified, as a t Heb, X. 26. ~- 3- ſingu- of the Principle of Religion. 47 ſingularity and weakneſs of character, and might be led by force of reaſoning to look upon the whole ſyſtem of Gentile ſuperſtitions with an early diſguſt, to which the generality of men were ſlowly conducted by weariſome experience. But, to omit that philoſophical invečtives againſt this perplexing fear of the Divine Judge are evi- dences of its real exiſtence and acknowledged prevalence, it may well be queſtioned whether philoſophers alſo, as diſciples of nature only, did not generally betray that their own hearts were really, however reluctantly, open to ſenſations common to mankind. Under conſciouſneſs of ſin and expectation of divine judgment they in- deed ſeem not without their ſtruggle. Appa- rently, the difference between many of them and the vulgar lay chiefly in the difference of ex- tremes to which the ſame principle reſpectively condućted them. - - I. One of theſe extremes was Atheiſm. The opinion was recommended as a refuge from the oppreſſive terror" of religion ; and the conſcious ſinner often accepted the ſhelter it offered him from the dread of divine judgment for ſins paſt," and even ſecurely proceeded in the meditated crime. - * Plut. de Superſtitione, rào; tº Pº vapºw Śiś, ź, pºsſ-94. Juv. Sat. xiii. 87. - — nullo credant mundum Rećtore moveri, Atque ideo intrepidi quaecungue altaria tangunt. See alſo Cudw. Intell Syſt, 664. II. Others, 48 Of the Principle of Religion. II. Others, who admitted the exiſtence, de- nied the moral character of the Divine Being. Diſguſted with the vulgar ſuperſtitions, and diſ- ſatisfied with Atheiſm, they ſought a ſecurity in the midway of the two extremes. Of the ſup- poſed indifferences and neutrality, or merely phyſical and local operation, of Divine Provi- dence, the avowed conſequence was, that fear of penal inflićtions by the moral Governor was ſet aſide. III. Another opinion, that divine power was ſimply beneficent y, was alſo likely to engage the reception of thoſe, who dreaded the evil of pu- niſhment for fin. As the repreſentation of the divine charaćter, under a diſpoſition to produce all poſſibilities of good to all perſons in all caſes, was plainly irreconcileable with the ſtanding conſtitution of nature, the probability is greater that it was embraced chiefly for the ſake of the relief it ſuggeſted to the fear of divine judgment for ſin. “ Furor eſt timere ſalutaria,” was the declared inference from it. And if ſome reſolved the whole character of the Divine Being into abſolute benevolence, * Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. p. 7. and p. 46, 51. Ed. Dav. and the next page, His terroribus, &c. y Cic. de Off, lib. ii. Num iratum timemus Jovem? At hoc equi- dem commune eſt omnium philoſophorum, non eorum modo qui Deum nihil habere ipſum negotii dicunt, et nihil exhibere alteri, ſed eorum etiam, qui Deum ſemper agere aliquid et moliri volunt, nun- quam mec iraſci Deum, nec nocere. See further, Whitby, Neceſſ. of Chriſt, Revel, p. 93. * others Of the Principle of Religion. 40 others contended that wrath could not be attri- buted to him. Hence Porphyry imputes ſuppli- catory and ſacrificial worſhip of the gods, upon ſuppoſition of their anger, to the ſuggeſtion of evil ſpirits; and the Epicurean antagoniſt of Ori- gen, upon the principles of his maſter, denies the poſſibility that men can incur divine diſpleaſure. IV. Others, to the ſame effect, ſpeculating upon actions, aſſerted that the good and evil of them were not in nature *, but in cuſtom only. The point of convenience was, that if the moral con- ſcience of man and the provincial rule and cuſ- tom repreſented them differently, the authority of the latter was concluſive againſt that of the former. Aćtual fin was to be determined only by the law and practice of the country; and conſequently if men, on account of their con- duct, had nothing to dread from the magiſtrate, they had no more to fear from God. W. Another ſuppoſed refuge from the fear of Divine vengeance for ſin lay in the opinion of the neceſſity of human actions * and human will. The ancients and moderns may perhaps take dif- ferent ways, but come to the ſame concluſion, that no action could be, is, or will be, contrary to the intention of the Author of nature. To this favourite poſition what was the real induce- * Plato. Theaetet. p. 167. Hobbes de Cive, p. 343. and Levia- than, pag. 24 and 63. Cudworth on Etern, and Immut. Morality. a Plut. de Stoic. Rep. Cic, de Fato, N. 39. E In ent 5 O Of the Principle of Religion. ment at all times may be eaſily conjectured. “If “Minos would judget righteouſly, he would pu- “niſh Fate, and not Siſyphus”—ſays an old apo- logiſt for the doctrine.—“Upon the ſcheme c of “ neceſſity, human actions, if they have any mo- “ral turpitude at all, muſt involve our Creator “ in the ſame guilt,” ſays a modern. As to the opinion, the only point in preſent view is, the ſhelter it offered from the dread of divine judg- ment for fin. - Thus the philoſophical opinions of ſages, as well as the ſuperſtitious perplexities of the vul- gar, ſeem to carry aſſignable appearances of their ſtruggle under the fear of divine vengeance for ſin, however ſtudiouſly they may have concealed it. That univerſal principle ſeems to have ſet the heart in motion ; and the urgency of it ap- pears in the efforts every where made, and the ſpeculative theories adopted, to palliate, or re- move it. Without a view of the divine promiſe of deliverance from the penal effects of iniquity, nature had nothing to ſet up, as a valid and truſty antidote to the fear of puniſhment. That re- pentance alone for paſt ſins would ever be ac- b Lucian in Jov. Confutat. p. 127. Ed. Graev. Euſeb. P. E. lib. vi. c. 7. 26o. tº hg.2% rivyvroz, & Zeiſs &xx 8x Exvtáy; &c. Mercurius was one of thoſe philoſophers who maintained this opinion, but with ſome reſerve, from his view of its effe&ts on bad men; roº; 3% airía; roß wa- zoº stuzpain ºva.pipwres, oùx 24'ićira, wori warrès #ys zczzot. Stob. Ecl. Ph. p. 76. %. • Hume's Eſſay on Lib. and Neceſſity. Indeed ſome advocates for the ſcheme of neceſſity endeavour to ſet aſide this conſequence. * cepted Of the Principle of Religion. 51 cepted in the place of that virtue, to the conti- nual exerciſe of which mankind had been bound in duty and in reaſon, was a preſumption, of which no traces appear. From a dread of the Divine Judge the vulgar ſought relief by mani- fold endeavours to ſatiate and diſarm him ; the philoſopher by principles calculated to lull and benumb the heart. The branches were different, but the root was apparently the ſame. OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELIGION U N DER THE PATRIARCHS AND THE LAW. P A R T II. S E CT I O N I. The imperfeół principle of religion fakes place, or diſappears, in the ſame proportion as the pro- miſe—The conſideration of Abel's ſacrifice re- ſumed—Reaſon and nature of ſacrifices in this ſtate of religion—Standing ſacrifices for ſin were animal burnt-offerings—hº hat the reli- gious principle under theſe circumſtances. THE preceding pages have tended to ſhew, that, in conſequence of the Fall, it became a very intereſting point whether there were any, and, if any, what means of appeaſing divine wrath, and averting puniſhment expected for ſin. And we have ſeen the inability of Gentile religioniſts and Gentile ſages, without any means of divine ap- F. 3 pointment, 54 Of the Principle of Religion. pointment, and without a divine promiſe of final deliverance from penal evils, either to remove or ſupport that fear of judgment, to which conſci- ouſneſs of fin devoted them. Particularly in Gen- tile religion the operation of that fear has been exemplified by ſome diſtinét views of its effects. The apparent character of the divine moral Go- vernor, and the principle of religious worſhip, have been found to be partly or totally different, according as he was viewed with the eyes of hu- man Innocence before the Fall, or of Guilt after it. As Love towards God, the original and perfect principle of religion, maintains no operation if the promiſe diſappears; ſo alſo, in whatever de- gree the promiſe intervenes, and acts upon the mind, fear of God, the imperfect principle of re- ligion, will recede proportionably. This branch of the general argument has been opened alrea- dy, and is now to be reſumed and extended to further views. º The divine acceptance of a ſacrifice of blood, offered with faith in the promiſe of redemption from the penal conſequences of the Fall, was, as we have already ſeen, aſcertained by ſignal reve- lation. And there appears no aſſignable reaſon for ſuppoſing, that this important point was not authenticated earlier than the ſacrifice of Abel. But even if no earlier, in his inſtance, at lateſt, in conſideration of faith in the promiſe, and of the blood of his ſacrifice, God teſtified “ of his “gifts, Of the Principle of Religion. 55 “gifts, that he was righteous.” Thus the ſacri- ficial blood of Abel ſpoke things ſo good, that it reſted only in the blood of the Redeemer himſelf to ſpeak better. Upon the authority of the Epiſtolary Writer to the Hebrews, and on view of the paſſage in Geneſis, the ſacrifice of Abel was before repre- ſented as animal, and on that account, wºetov Sv- oria, “ a much more ſacrifice” than that of the fruits of the ground, with which it was con- traſted. - From the fact, then, it appears, that faith in the promiſe without the death of the ſacrifice, and the death of the ſacrifice without that faith, would in either caſe have been leſs than it had ſeemed good to the Deity to accept and au- thorize. And ſince the ſacrifice of an animal had weight in the caſe, at leaſt ſo far as to con- ſtitute one inducement with the Divine Being to teſtify of the offerer “ that he was righteous,” the queſtion ariſes as to the ground of this pro- ceeding. If it lay in the efficacy of animal ſacri- fices, God would ſcarcely, we may think, have excepted afterwards to their ſufficiency for atone- ment. By the ſacrifice only of the Lamb of God, for the “redemption of tranſgreſſions that were “ under the firſt teſtament,” and before it no leſs, the promiſe was to be fulfilled. It ſeems, then, that animal ſacrifice became a real conſideration only by ſhewing forth the Lord's death till he came at firſt, in the ſame E 4 IIlan 1162F 56 Of the Principle of Religion. manner as the breaking of bread and the effuſion of wine, according to his own inſtitution, be- came ſo by ſhewing forth his death till his com- ing again. A ſacrifice of blood, under the divine ſanction, had a repreſentative and ſacramental virtue, and ſo far was a real ground of divine ac- ceptance for the juſtification of faithful penitents. The nature of ſacrifices in true religion ſeems ſo peculiar and appropriated, that they cannot be interpreted juſtly upon Gentile ideas. They had no where any other than a relative value; and in Gentiliſm that relation, which alone could give them effect any where, did not ſubſiſt. There they were ſingle objećts; and the ideas formed of them, as ſuch, could have no proper applica- tion to caſes, wherein they were conſidered as repreſentative and ſacramental oblations. But to return—After the ſacrifice of Abel it appears evident that faith in a promiſed Redeemer became an eſtabliſhed principle. This was be- fore exemplified in the words of Lamech, the contemporary of Adam, on the birth of Noah, and in other inſtances, particularly that of Abel's ſacrifice. Of Abel's caſe it was alſo an effect, that ſacri- fices for ſin commonly conſiſted of animal burnt- offerings. Thus, Noah took of every clean beaſt, and offered burnt-offerings, and the Lord there- upon ſaid in his heart, “I will not again curſe “the ground any more.” And Job offered burnt- offerings according to the number of his ſons, OI). Of the Principle of Religion. 57 on days appropriated reſpectively to each of them, and ſaid, “It may be my ſons have fin- “ned, and curſed God in their hearts;” and ſi- milar offerings for atonement were preſcribed to each of his friends. So afterwards, when David came to ſacrifice, that the plague might be ſtayed, “Behold, here be oxen for burnt-ſacrifice,” was the language of Araunah. There was no parti- cular direction in the caſe, the ſtanding cuſtom " ſuggeſted his offer. Thus the ſervant of the true God was enabled to abate the natural apprehenſion of penal ſuffer- ings, by a known promiſe of future deliverance, and by an oblation, which had been certainly accepted. To his eye divine diſpleaſure appeared ſoftened by goodneſs, and love towards God might therefore operate with him as a principle of religion. This was the ſtate of things under a ſtanding revelation, occaſionally repeated and confirmed by new communications from heaven. But ſtill, as the accompliſhment of the divine promiſe continued an obječt of faith, in propor- tion as faith was weak or lively, fear or love of God, as an object, would revive more or leſs, and not entirely, even in that religion, which was founded upon divine revelation. A degree of fear would remain, equal to the imperfection * Compare the language of God reſpecting the iniquity of Eli. I Sam. iii. 14. As the ſacrifice and burnt-offering were in common uſe for all expiatory caſes, they might be uſed in that of Eli. of 58 Of the Principle of Religion. of love, ſince the latter, only when it is perfect, caſteth out the former. The principle of love towards God was but in a ſtate of revival and improvement, unfolding itſelf indeed more and more, yet ſtill ſhort of that perfection which it poſſeſſed in the beginning, and might finally reach. - S E CT I O N II. The perfeół principle of religion more fully re- eſtabliſhed under the law—the means therein authorized—the ſame with thoſe previouſly ac- cepted in the caſe of Abel—the character of God, as author of the law—illuſtration thereby given to the promiſe—apparent effect of this wpon Moſes. HERE then we may change the view, and pro- ceed to obſerve the principle of love towards God regaining a much more conſiderable portion of its original influence, as ſoon as revelation ex- plicitly declared the divine acceptance of ſacrifice for redemption. - The promiſe, delivered, as we have ſeen, ſo early, after having been frequently elucidated and enforced by divine revelation, was confirmed with much leſs reſerve at the delivery of the Jewiſh law. It was then declared, that burnt- ſacrifices, Of the Principle of Religion. 59 ſacrifices for ſin, which any of the congregation might offer unto the Lord, ſhould, upon due per- formance of certain appointed rites in making the oblation, be accepted as means of deliverance from the penal effects of ſin. The prieſts, it was commanded, “ſhall burn all upon the altar, for “it is a burnt-offering, an oblation made by fire “ for a ſweet ſavour unto the Lord.” Aaron alſo was directed to make reconciliation upon the horns of the altar of incenſe once in a year, with the blood of the ſin-offering, in the day of reconciliation; “once in a year ſhall he make “reconciliation upon it, throughout your gene- “ rations; this is moſt holy unto the Lord.” In another place the Lord ordered Moſes to offer every day a calf for reconciliation. And with reſpect to animal offerings it was declared gene- rally, “the life of the fleſh is in the blood, and I “ have given it to you upon the altar to make “ atonement for the ſoul.” Here the very means were expreſsly reeſta- bliſhed, which God had before authorized in the caſe of Abel. Of the ſame means the end alſo was the ſame. In the inſtance of Abel, “God “teſtified of his gifts that he was righteous;” and to theſe Moſaical oblations reconciliation and atonement were expreſsly annexed. It may then be repeated here, that apparently the ſacrifices of the law, if offered with faith in the promiſe, had a repreſentative and ſacramental virtue, as ſhew- Ing ÖO Of the Principle of Religion. ing forth the Lord's death till he came to offer up the ſacrifice of himſelf, for the redemption of tranſgreſſions under that teſtament. Upon this ground they were accepted for temporal redemp- tion; eternal redemption was to be obtained by the “ much more ſacrifice” of the Son of God, whoſe blood would therefore ſpeak better things than either that of Abel, or that of the law. In theſe ordinances, and in others of ſimilar effect, God vouchſafed to his people aſſurances of reconciliation with himſelf, and of redemption from puniſhment. Thus the divine mercy, which had been partially revealed at ſeveral preceding periods, was diſplayed much more diſtinétly at the ſettlement of the Moſaic ritual. Declara- tions ſo direct and explicit, that God, notwith- ſtanding his neceſſary juſtice, would grant in- demnity to the guilty, could not fail to animate the faith and aſſure the hearts of his people. Divine goodneſs would be placed in a light more ſtriking and endearing than before, by this new alleviation of the terror of divine judgment; and proportionably as God was now feared the leſs, he would certainly be loved the more. Charac- teriſtically, then, as author of the law, that is, amiably, his own proclamation deſcribed him ; “ the Lord, the Lord merciful and gracious, ſlow “ to anger, and abundant in goodneſs and truth, “ reſerving mercy for thouſands, forgiving ini- “ quity, tranſgreſſion, and ſin.” - One Of the Principle of Religion. 6 I One great end, then, the law ſufficiently an- ſwered. If the ſervant of God, in the early ages of the world, relying upon the divine acceptance of ſacrifice with faith in the promiſe for juſtifi- cation of ſinners, approached the ſacred altar and preſented his oblation to God with love, it may be preſumed that the deſcendant of Abra- ham would look up with great increaſe of affec- tion to the God of his fathers, when he diſcerned in the Moſaic diſpenſation the nearer approach and opening brightneſs of that promiſe of re- demption from penal evils, which, although ſeen indeed by their eyes of faith, yet appeared to them at greater diſtance, and with leſs preciſion. And whoever had entertained the livelieſt faith in that promiſe, would be moſt likely to perceive immediately that the Moſaical eſtabliſhment of atonements and ſacrifices for ſin, virtually recog- niſed and ſupported it. - It may not be impoſſible to exemplify this in the conduct of Moſes. When interceding for the people who had ſinned by the worſhip of the golden calf, he urged in their behalf the divine promiſe to the fathers; “Remember Abraham, “ Iſaac, and Jacob, thy ſervants, to whom thou “ſwareſt by thine own ſelf, and ſaidſt unto them, “I will multiply your ſeed as the ſtars of hea- “ ven, and all this land, that I have ſpoken of, “will I give unto your ſeed, and they ſhall in- “ herit it for ever.” This interceſſion was of. fered before the glory of the Lord had paſſed by 62 Of the Principle of Religion. by him. But during his ſecond abode in the mount, no ſooner had the proclamation of the divine mercy, grace, and forgiving goodneſs, been «» & * & made ſo ſtrongly in his hearing, than be “made “ haſte, and bowed himſelf to the earth, and “worſhipped, and ſaid, O Lord, I pray thee, if I “ have found grace in thy fight, that the Lord “would now go with us, and pardon our iniqui- “ty and our ſin.” He could not indeed be igno- rant of the divine beneficence; but the charac- ters of mercy, grace, and goodneſs, which he had heard the proclamation attributing determi- nately to God, made ſo ſudden and ſtriking an impreſſion on his mind, that he took from them immediate occaſion to implore forgiveneſs of the national ſins, although he had not at the time any particular cauſe or ſubject of interceſſion. If by the words, “pardon our iniquity,” Mo- ſes ſhould be thought to refer to the laſt ſin of Iſrael, the worſhip of the molten image, it will follow on that idea, that he has reſumed the ſub- jećt, but changed the terms of his interceſſion : in one inſtance, he urged the univerſal and the peculiar promiſe made to Abraham, Iſaac, and Jacob in behalf of his people; but in the other he inſiſted on the characters aſſumed in the di- vine proclamation. And he took the ſame ground of interceſſion for thoſe who murmured; “ Now “I beſeech thee let the power of my Lord be “great, according as thou haſt ſpoken, ſaying, “The Lord is ſlow to anger, and of great mer- “cy, Of the Principle of Religion. {53 & & cy, and forgiving iniquity, tranſgreſſion, and • ſin.” From this particular circumſtance in the con- dućt of Moſes, it may poſſibly appear * to others, as upon the whole it appears to me, that he im- mediately perceived in the characters of divine mercy, and forgiving goodneſs, which the pro- clamation aſſumed, and the legal inſtitution ex- emplified, a confirmation of the univerſal pro- miſe to the fathers ; and alſo, that he felt in the tenor of that proclamation ſomething ſo pecu- liarly endearing and cogent, that he could not forbear to offer inſtant interceſſion for his people, grounded upon the divine chara&ters then newly revealed with ſuch diſtinét particularity. It may be thus accounted for; the law confiderably il- luſtrated and verified the promiſe of the univerſal bleſfing, by eſtabliſhing a ſyſtem of atonements, and thereby mitigating the fear of puniſhment for ſin; whence it naturally happened, that the characters of “ merciful, gracious, and forgiv- “ing,” which God had applied to himſelf as au- thor of the law, ſhould thus ſtrongly engage the notice of Moſes, and take the lead in his mind. The promiſe had made, and the proclamation then renewed, ſome diſcoveries of divine mercy ; * If what is here attributed to Moſes ſhould ſeem to the reader, however I may apprehend otherwiſe, to have more of refinement than ſolidity, I can only ſay that it does not affect the main argument purſued, but 64 Of the Principle of Religion. but the latter revelation was far more expreſs than the former. The proclamation and the law threw a ſtriking light on the promiſe, and inti- mated more explicitly than ever, that it implied a divine purpoſe of granting indemnity to fin- ners. From previous and indeterminate decla- rations of the divine purpoſe, he turned to the laſt and the cleareſt, and reſted his interceſſional entreaty upon it. S E C T I O N III. In what degree the original principle of religion was reſtored by the law—oppoſite characters in the proclamation, when the divine glory paſſed before Moſes—evidences of imperfection in the law. BUT whatever effect theſe divine ordinances of mercy and grace might have in recalling and re- inſtating love towards God, as the religious prin- ciple, yet many circumſtances ſhew that it did not return unmixed and perfect, and reſume all that influence in religion, which it had poſſeſſed at the beginning. For upon comparing the cha- racters, which the Lord aſſumed in the procla- mation of his name, with thoſe notions of him, which the appointment of ſacrifices and offices - for Of the Principle of Religion. 65 for propitiation, as in the law, would naturally ſuggeſt, we ſhall find them ſimilar and agreeing in kind, but not in degree. Ordinances of atone- ment for ſin, of reconciliation to the ſinner, and of redemption, were indeed ſo many acts of mercy, of grace, and abundant goodneſs: but forbearance of puniſhment, reconciliation to ſin– ners, and redemption, in the ſenſe and to the ex- tent in which they muſt be underſtood in the law, are not together conſiderable enough to ful- fil the plenteouſneſs of the divine grace and goodneſs. * In truth, the Moſaic diſpenſation brought re- lief, but not remedy; and however this clearer diſcovery of the loving-kindneſs of the Lord might comfort and encourage the deſcendants of Abraham, yet they were not enabled by it to comprehend the full diſplay and conſummation of his purpoſes of grace to mankind. For that the Lord was merciful, but that he would not “make the wicked innocent,” that he reſerved mercy for thouſands, but yet that he would viſit “ the iniquity of the fathers upon “ the children, and the children's children,” however different characters, were nevertheleſs aſſumed by the Lord in the ſame proclamation. It was therein at once declared, that promiſed mercy ſhould not induce impunity, and that the abundance of forgiving grace ſhould not over- rule the imputation of the guilt of the fathers to the children. In other inſtances alſo, forgiveneſs F did 66 Of the Principle of Religion. did not prevent a denunciation of wrath. When Moſes offered interceſſion for thoſe who had pro- voked the Lord by murmuring, he referred to the roclamation ; ll.V.A. \,\ , lili V-2 i. *. * * * * * Fºº ſubſtance and tenor of the divine p “I beſeech thee, let the power of my Lord be “great, according as thou haſt ſpoken, ſaying, “The Lord is ſlow to anger, and of great mercy, “ and forgiving iniquity and ſin, but not making “ the wicked innocent, and viſiting the iniquity “ of the fathers upon the children.” The an- ſwer of God was gracious; “I have forgiven it “ at thy requeſt:” but an exception and reſerva- tion of puniſhment immediately ſucceeds; “Not- “ withſtanding, as I live, all thoſe men, which “ have ſeen my glory, and my miracles, and have “ tempted me theſe ten times, and have not “obeyed my voice, certainly they ſhall not ſee “ the land whereof I ſware unto the fathers, nei- “ ther ſhall they that provoke me ſee it.” So that the forgiveneſs obtained by the interceſſion of Moſes did not totally remove the penal conſe- quence of undutiful murmurs; there ſtill re- mained a judicial excluſion of offenders from the promiſed land. - - From theſe and other inſtances which might be produced to the ſame effect, it appears, that the Moſaic covenant, however it atteſted and ex- emplified divine grace and goodneſs, was not de- livered without very aſſignable limitation and abatement. - # Indeed light and obſcurity uſually meet in the ſame Of the Principle of Religion. 67 ſame diſpenſation of heaven, eſpecially in caſes, like that before us, of prophetical revelation; as if it was the purpoſe of God, to animate human wea- rineſs, but ſtill to keep up the exerciſe of faith, and in ſome meaſure to reward, without relax- ing, the patience and hope of thoſe who wait for him. In the inſtance now under conſideration, the releaſe of ſinners from perſonal ſufferings, how- ever it might comfort the heart and conciliate the love of man, was nevertheleſs but a diſtant ſtep towards the accompliſhment of the gracious deſigns of God. The imperfection of the law of Moſes for every purpoſe, except that for which it was in- - tended, which was only partial and introductory, is evident on every view. The Writer to the Hebrews has ſtated the inſufficiency of it, from the failure of the Levitical ſacrifices “ to make “ the comers thereunto perfect in things pertain- “ing to the conſcience,” which is the indiſ- penſable requiſite in every offering for ſin. The legal inſtitutions formed a temporary ſyſtem of religious diſcipline; they related “to meats and “ drinks, and waſhings, and carnal ordinances, “impoſed on them until the times of reforma- “tion.” All of theſe principally regarded the body, and ſcarcely affected the mind, and were therefore inſtruments of external rather than of inward purification. But, with a view to the argument before us, the defects of the ſacrifices " . F 2 for 68 Of the Principle of Religion. for fin under the law may be thus briefly repre- ſented. They failed on account of their num- ber; many of them were particularly reſtrained, as inſtruments of expiation, to a few caſes only —They were periodical; ſacrifices to be repeated year by year, and even day by day continually, had not a permanent but only a temporary effect —They were national and limited; Iſrael had been choſen excluſively for the people of God, although the promiſed bleſſing had been deli- vered in univerſal terms. But in one indiſpenſa- ble point they were ſignally deficient. The Lord commanded the prieſt to wear upon his forehead a plate of pure gold with this inſcription, “Ho- “ lineſs to the Lord,” that thereby he might bear the iniquity of the offerings; “ It ſhall always “ be upon his forehead,” ſaith God, “to make “ them acceptable before the Lord.” The in- ſufficiency of the Moſaical offerings was thus expreſſively declared by their divine author, at the time of his preſcribing them. In a word, the Levitical ſacrifices were defective in theſe principal inſtances; that atonement and redemp- tion, of which they were means, were tranſitory, and required to be renewed by ſtated repetitions of the offerings—it was provincial, and not uni- verſal—and the very vićtims were exceptionable, and of courſe inadequate. If they were not completely adapted to make all men, and that for ever, perfect in all things “pertaining to the “conſcience,” they might, it is poſſible, contain the Of the Principle of Religion. ÖQ the partial tranſcript, but not the real ſubſtance, of a ſufficient expiatory ſacrifice; they might ex- hibit the ſhadow, but not the very image, of the good things of promiſe. SECT I O N IV. The natural concluſion from the foregoing appear- ances in the Law—that concluſion facilitated by the teſtimony of the Prophets—the prophecy by Moſes of another prophet like to himſelf—the prophecy by Jeremiah of a new covenant—di- vine characters in the proclamation to Moſes, and in that prophecy of Jeremiah, contraſted— reflection upon their difference. THUS, however love towards God, upon en- larged views of his mercy, might be encouraged, and the fear of his judgment for ſin yet further abated, by the Moſaic ſcheme of atonements, it was nevertheleſs certain and obvious, that the ſacrifices for ſin, under the law, were depreciated by the ſame divine authority that appointed them. At the very time when the law was de- livered, the Lord proclaimed that he would not “clear the guilty,” but would viſit “the iniquity “ of the fathers upon the children;” and though he reſerved “mercy for thouſands,” yet that he reſerved puniſhment alſo for “the children's F 3 “ chil- 70 Of the Principle of Religion. “ children.” There appeared therefore confi- derable reaſon for concluding, that plenary re- demption, the hope of which had been at firſt authorized, and repeatedly confirmed, by the pro- miſes of God, was not fully accompliſhed by the law. Yet ſince it was inconceivable, that God would deliver promiſes without fulfilling them, and require faith without rewarding it, the pious deſcendant of Abraham, upon reflection, would be induced even by the law itſelf to carry his view forward; and would gradually become aſſured, that deliverance from the penal effects of fin, which had been promiſed of old, although in- deed confirmed and partly accompliſhed by the law of Moſes, yet remained to be fulfilled by other means in the ſeaſon ordained of God. This expectation would be fixed upon his mind by the teſtimony of the Prophets, as well as by the evidence of the Law. For example—the predićtion of Moſes, that God would raiſe up from among them a prophet, like unto himſelff, could be verified only in the perſon of another lawgiver, and another mediator between God and his people. This became more and more plain" from ſeveral occaſional prophecies, all of them relating to the ſame divine meſſenger predićted See the reſemblance between Chriſt and Moſes purſued through a variety of circumſtances. Jortin's Rem. on Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory, vol. i. pag. 202, &c. * See Iſaiah xlii. 4. li. 4. That the people of Iſrael ačtually en- tertained ſuch an expectation, appears from 1 Maccab. xiv. 41. by Of the Principle of Religion. 71 by Moſes, and deſcribing him as a lawgiver and mediator. But the prophecy of Moſes was ſet in a very clear light by another of Jeremiah ; “Behold ! the days come, when 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.” Since, then, the Moſaic characters of lawgiver and mediator would certainly be ſuſtained by the meſſenger of the new covenant, it was reaſonable that they, who believed the divine miſſion of Moſes and Jeremiah, ſhould expect the predićted prophet, like unto Moſes, in the perſon of that meſſenger, and a new diſpenſation of grace in that covenant, which was to be “not according to the cove- “nant” given by Moſes. The deſcendant of Abraham might alſo be enabled to diſcern, upon a careful view, what re- lation would ſubfift between that new covenant and the divine promiſe of mercy given to the fa- thers, by comparing the charaćters, which God aſſumed in the proclamation made to Moſes, with thoſe which the prophecy of Jeremiah at- tributed to him. Conſidering each of them as deſcriptive of the divine charaćter, in reſpect of that covenant to which either of them referred, he might have ſeen reaſon to ſuppoſe, that as far as the characters of the proclamation and the prophecy agreed, ſo far the covenant of Moſes, F 4 and 72 Of the Principle of Religion. and the new covenant predićted by Jeremiah, would, in the end, equally confirm, and equally illuſtrate, the promiſes of mercy to the fathers : and, on the contrary, as far as the charaćters in both diſagreed, that ſo far there would be, in the one covenant or the other, a manifeſt advantage and preeminence in confirming and illuſtrating the promiſes. - Let us then attend to this compariſon, and briefly contraſt the terms of the prophecy and the proclamation with each other. At the delivery of the law, the Lord aſſumed the characters of “merciful, gracious, forgiving “ iniquity, tranſgreſſion, and ſin;”—when he delivered by Jeremiah the promiſe of that new covenant, he repreſented himſelf in the ſame character; “I will forgive their iniquities.” Both, then, of theſe covenants were diſpenſations of mercy, grace, and pardon, for ſo far the two de- ſcriptions of the divine charaćter run in the ſame ſtrain. But they agree no further: and the ſub- ſequent difference plainly marks that very cir- cumſtance, in which the predićted covenant would excel that, which God had made with the fathers at their coming out of Egypt. The proclamation is cloſed with a denunciation, that God will not “clear the guilty,” but that he will viſit “the iniquity of the fathers upon the chil- “dren, and the children’s children :”—but the prophecy of Jeremiah is concluded with a pro- miſe, “I will remember their ſin no more.” There Of the Principle of Religion. 73 There is the utmoſt contrariety between them. That reſervation of puniſhment, which remained in the firſt of the two revelations, is entirely ob- literated in the ſecond; and all penal viſitation for paſt ſin is excluded for ever. So that not only the imperfection of the Moſaic covenant was obvious; but alſo the comparative preemi- nence of that new covenant which was to ſuc- ceed it, and the entire accompliſhment therein of “the mercy promiſed to the fathers,” might be aſcertained upon prophetical evidence. The Apoſtle Paul, treating of the difference of theſe two covenants, applies a paſſage of Scripture, wherein God is repreſented as contraſting them, and, in an animated manner, enforcing the one above the other by this very diſtinétion; “ For “ this is my covenant unto them, when I ſhall “take away their ſins.” SECTION V. Religious ſtate of the Jew—of the Gentile—the comparative advantages of the firſt great, but not free from material exception—the compa- rative diſadvantages of the latter without any alleviation. If then the bulk of mankind, diſciples of nature only, and not of revelation, and therefore without promiſe 74 Of the Principle of Religion. promiſe of redemption from the puniſhment of fin, ſtill laboured under the dread of wrath to come, ſlaves at once of guilt and fear; the de- ſcendant of Abraham, who beheld God thus gra- dually withdrawing the veil, which kept the promiſed diſpenſation of plenary deliverance from open view, would doubtleſs mitigate the fear of judgment by an endearing proſpect of his mercy. Love towards God, the perfect principle of religion, would therefore reſume, under the law, a confiderable portion of its original influence; but only ſo much of it, as ſuited a ſtate of ad- vancement to that perfect maturity of ſtrength, which alone could enable it totally to caſt out fear. The ſpirit of bondage to fear would not be extinguiſhed but by a full eſtabliſhment of the title to cry, Abba, Father, by the ſpirit of adop- tion. In a word ; the deſcendant of Abraham, conſcious of ſin, and perceiving that a ſufficient expiation of it was not yet made to the divine Judge, would remain in ſome ſubjećtion to that fear of his judgment for iniquity, which could be completely caſt out only by an entire accom- pliſhment of the promiſe. But in him that fear would be abated in a degree proportioned to his faith in the promiſe of redemption : and that promiſe was enforced, and partly verified, in the law, which contained a predićtion of the coming of another lawgiver and mediator, to eſtabliſh a new covenant of unreſerved indemnity for ſin- Il CIS. Up OI] Of the Principle of Religion. 75 Upon comparing, then, the caſes of the Jew and the Gentile, the ſpiritual neceſſities of both ſeem eaſily diſcernible.—Univerſal conſciouſneſs of guilt fixed upon the human heart a fearful ſenſe of the divine Avenger of fin. The at- tempt to remove this apprehenſion by ſacrificial propitiations was of the ſame univerſal extent. But the manifold efforts of the Gentiles for this purpoſe had not removed, nor even alleviated, their fear of divine judgment. The diſciples of revelation, having received the promiſe, were alone enabled by faith to aſcertain the divine purpoſe of mercy. The Gentile ſacri- fices were expedients adopted from tradition, and applied ignorantly as remedies of fearful guilt; but the fin-offerings of the Jews were rites of ſpecial appointment for atonement. The former gave no relief to the diſtreſs of the heart; but the latter were authentic ſigns of a covenant of grace. The former, if found upon long trial unprofitable, would naturally fall into diſuſe, and moſt probably leave mankind, deſtitute of any religion, to labour on with an aggravation of guilt and fear; but the latter, being inſtituted expreſsly for a ſeaſon, would, according to the plain tenor of divine prophecy, introduce and eſtabliſh an unexceptionable and everlaſting diſ- penſation of mercy. So manifeſt and important was the advantage of the Jew, in excluſively poſſeſſing “ the oracles of God.” But ſtill, the law, in many caſes, provided no offering 76 Of the Principle of Religion. offering for the tranſgreſſion, and delivered up the offender to puniſhment, without preſent means of atonement. It required perfeót obedience, un- der penalty of a curſe, and enjoined ceremonies ſo frequent and burdenſome, that even ſingular zeal and piety were unable to maintain their uni- form obſervance; “They continued not in my “ covenant, and I regarded them not, faith the “Lord.” As the Jew had failed in well-doing, his ſin lay at the door; and conſequently the fear of a divine Avenger would have preſſed upon his mind with all its natural weight, if he had not been taught and encouraged to rely upon the coming of that covenant, in which mercy would finally rejoice againſt judgment. Of this the direct reverſe appears in the caſe of the Gentile. He had been ſtruggling for a length of time under the dread of divine wrath, without any relief or abatement of his fears. He could not deviſe victims more precious than the lives of men, or more dear than the blood of his children, even when he felt that thoſe lives had been offered up, and that blood poured out ſo long and ſo profuſely in vain. We cannot avoid looking back with unfeigned pity upon him, ſtill ſeeking reſt, but finding none; and, at the ſame time we obſerve, without ſurpriſe, the inſult of philoſophy, concurring with the diſappointment of the vulgar to haſten the downfall of Gentiliſm. But that downfall principally reſulted, not from the inſult of philoſophy, but from the general - diſap- sof the Principle of Religion. 77 diſappointment of mankind. To quiet the con- ſcience, and to repreſs the fearful apprehenſion of puniſhment, by appeaſing the wrath of the Moral Judge of the world, had been the great principle of Gentile religion. It had failed to accompliſh this end, and would therefore tend to decline. And to the bulk of mankind, ſtruggling under this alternative, either to ſeek ſome new and un- tried expedients of divine propitiation, or to con- tinue their accuſtomed ſacrifices without hope, we may juſtly appropriate that exclamation of diſtreſs and perplexity, which the preaching of St. Peter extorted from his hearers; “Men and “brethren, what ſhall we do *" or OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELIGION T T ºr w UN ID ER THE GO SPEL. PART III. SECTION I. The ſtate of the Gentile and the Jew might natu- rally lead them reſpe&#ively to the faith of Chriſ? crucified—religious principle under the Goſpel oppoſite to that of Gentile religion, and more perfect than that of the Patriarchal, or Jewiſh —this the effect of the death of Chriſt—re- flections upon the Apoſtolical repreſentations of it. GENTILE religion left mankind to continue their ſtruggle under that fear of a divine Avenger, which has appeared the ruling principle of it. The covenant of Moſes, although it afforded clearer views of human indemnity than the ori- ginal promiſe conveyed, and thereby further re- ſtored 8O Of the Principle of Religion. ſtored the love of God as an object, yet left a re- ſervation of puniſhment unremoved. From theſe repreſentations of religion, when it had not, as in the firſt inſtance, or when it had, as in the ſecond, a divine revelation for its ground; it ſeems that the Gentile and the Jew had both been condućted under the providence of God, the one by religious diſappointment, the other by divine promiſe, to a ſtate and diſpoſition of mind moſt likely to facilitate the impreſſion of the Goſpel upon them. The religious ſervice of the one had been a ſtruggle under guilty fear, which it had not allayed; that of the other tended to reſtore the influence of that perfect principle of love towards God, on which religion proceeded in the time of primaeval innocence, and on which it ever will proceed, as far as it correſponds with the perfections of God and of man. To the one the Goſpel offered a certain remedy for an evil ſtill raging in the worſt ſtate; to the other it preſented an accompliſhment of a cure yet remaining imperfect. Of providential deſign and condućt ſo much appears in thus preparing the world, partly by means of its very errors, partly by limited and incomplete revelations, for the reception of the Goſpel, that few unprejudiced mindsh will pre- * If the prevalence of the Goſpel could be aſcribed to natural cauſes only, ſtill it may be true, and of divine authority. To prove it ſeaſonable will not prove it falſe, although Mr. Gibbon, with Bayle, Voltaire, Lord Shafteſbury, and the Author of the Life of Homer, - ſeem Of the Principle of Religion. 81 ſume, either that Chriſtianity is ſuſpicious be- cauſe it was ſeaſonable, or that any object would ſeem diſpoſed to ſuſpect it on that account. The queſtion remains, whether human things had not been condućted gradually to ſuch a ſituation as to favour its admiſſion. If they had, there is no pre- fumption of human impoſture in it. The decline of Paganiſm was not total; it was in a condition to ſtruggle; the law of Moſes was in force, as a divine diſpenſation; over both the Goſpel prevailed. The argument from the prevalence of Chriſtianity goes, not only upon the cauſes that favoured, but alſo on thoſe that obſtrućted, its progreſs; and when drawn out, with a due reſpect to both parts of the caſe, has great weight. See Jortin's Diſcourſes on Chriſtianity, Diſc. 2. It is remarked, that Chriſtianity was much aided in its progreſs by the decline of ancient, namely of Pagan, prejudice. But even admitting it to be true, that Chriſtianity was aſſiſted in its progreſs by this cauſe, ſtill it may be obſerved, that the decline of Pagan prejudice does not appear merely accidental. The cauſes of that decline are indeed ſaid to be theſe: “the contagion of ſceptical writings diffuſed in the minds “ of men;” and “ the faſhion of incredulity, deſcending from the “higheſt to the loweſt rank of people.” But theſe appear effe&ts of a higher cauſe, which was not accidental, but conſtitutionally inhe- rent in the ſyſtem itſelf, as a principle of its own decline. It lay in the inſufficiency of Pagan religion to propitiate the divine Judge of the world, and to abate the natural fear of his vengeance. Hence it naturally followed, that incredulity ſhould grow into faſhion. And which of theſe two cauſes, that affigned by the author of the remark, or that ariſing from the view here taken of Paganiſm, reſts upon the fairer ground of probability, and is moſt decidedly equal to the conſe- quence, may be left to the judgment of every diſcerning and impar- tial mind. - * We are told alſo, that the pračtice of ſuperſtition is ſo congenial to the multitude, that if they are forcibly awakened, they ſtill regret the loſs of their pleaſing viſion ; i.e. unleſs I miſapprehend the words, the neceſſity of having ſome ſuperſtition or other to practiſe is ſo urgent upon the vulgar, that after they have diſcarded one mode of it, they will not be at reſt till they have adopted another. But of this painful and comfortleſs ſituation, the cauſes ſuggeſted by the view we have taken of Paganiſm are theſe ; conſciouſneſs of fin, and fear G of 82 Of the Principle of Religion. have been embraced ſo generally and devotedly, when ſuch had been the religious diſappointment of moſt men, and ſuch were the ſpiritual neceſſi- ties of all, if it had not been ſo deſerving as to of Divine vengeance, preſſing even with aggravation upon the mind, and with no expedients at hand to mitigate it, but ſuch as had al- ready proved without effect. From which of theſe cauſes the fituation of men would be rendered moſt certainly and moſt deeply painful and comfortleſs, may be left, as before, to the decifion of every confiderate and candid mind. I conceive it to be true, that Paganiſm had de- clined, not accidentally, but by failing, upon general experience, to par cify the fearful conſcience of finners, and propitiate an offended God; that it had left a very numerous portion of human kind in a painful and comfortleſs ſituation, for want of any other means of expiating fin, and alleviating the fear of puniſhment, than thoſe, in which they had already been diſappointed; and therefore that Chriſtianity, as it pro- vided a ſacrifice for fin, and offered pardon to finners, had ſo great an advantage in the compariſon, that it would naturally be received with preference and favour. There appears much uncertainty, to ſay no more, in the ſuggeſtion, that “an objećt much leſs deſerving “would have filled the vacant place in the human heart,” when we remember that Chriſtianity offered (what Paganiſm had left ſtill to be ſought) univerſal forgiveneſs of fins. Then let this capital excellence, the doćtrine of univerſal forgive- meſs, calculated above all others to welcome the Goſpel to the ſouls of all men, be admitted to its proper rank and effect among the cauſes aſſigned for the early prevalence of Chriſtianity. The Goſpel was evidently adapted to the wants and painful ſituation of men, by the doStrine it contains, of a voluntary ſacrifice for ſin, accepted of God, and univerſal remiſſion of ſin thereby obtained. It was likely that this great prerogative ſhould conciliate notice; and becauſe Chriſtianity accumulated proofs, internally and externally, that the forgiveneſs of ſin, which it propoſed, had been the ancient promiſe, and was the preſent offer of God, it would be as likely that it ſhould gather ſtrength and prevail. No ground then appears for an inti- mation that it is ſuſpicious, becauſe it was ſuited to the neceſſities of mankind. ſupply Of the Principle of Religion. 83. ſupply mankind with that which they wanted ſo much, but had ſought in vain, namely, a perfect ſacrifice for ſin. - It remains, then, to be ſhewn, that tormenting and hopeleſs fear of the divine Avenger of fin, which had charaćterized the religion of the Gen- tile, is not the characteriſtical principle of the Goſpel, but love towards God, in that perfection which it had not reſumed either in the Patriarchal or Jewiſh religion. -> - It was the complaint of human nature, “My “fins have taken ſuch hold upon me, that I am “not able to look up ; yea, they are more in “ number than the hairs of my head, and my “heart hath failed me.” Such is the language of Jewiſh penitence; and it would, at leaſt, as properly and juſtly become the Gentile. But the downcaſt eye had encouragement to look up, and the failing heart to revive, at the Goſpel-call, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away “ the fins of the world !” The voice of conſcience would ceaſe to accuſe, and the view of the Di- vine Judge to terrify, when complete propitia- tion appeared, and “the deſire of all nations” WaS COIIle. In the apparent character of God, in the ſitua- tion and proſpects of mankind, and conſequently in the principle of religion, the death of Chriſt accompliſhed that great revolution, which God, from the time of the promiſe to its completion, had been forwarding in many ways, but with G 2 One 84 Of the Principle of Religion. one deſign. And as temporary and particular redemption by animal ſacrifices, as ſigns of the future great oblation, had been always obtained, under divine appointment, by means of death ; ſo alſo eternal and univerſal redemption through Chriſt accrued to ſinners, by means of his death. In all of them, their effects, however unequal, turned on the ſame common circumſtance, that is, on the ſhedding of blood. Of Chriſt's death it was the firſt and greateſt objećt to obtain the indemnity of the world from penal evils; if it had others, and indeed it had many, they were ſecondary and ſubordinate. Thus, for inſtance, his death is not repreſented in Scripture as mere- ly occaſional, and intended for the ſake of his reſurrection, whatever purpoſes that might an- ſwer. It is one thing to offer the ſacrifice of himſelf purpoſely to put away ſin; it is another to undergo death, only in order to evince a fu- ture life. For the firſt of theſe purpoſes he died; for the laſt, among others, he roſe again from the dead. The Scripture places his death in the light of a ſingle object, as a real condition of indem- nity. - On view, then, of the light in which the Apo- ſtles of Chriſt repreſent the death of their Lord, it may be of ſome uſe to ſuggeſt the following conſiderations. In the mind of God the death of his Son ſtood as the great and the firſt object, to which, as to an archetype, all proviſional ap- pointments were conformed in various degrees, w and Of the Principle of Religion. 85 and of which, as they were intended to be more nearly or remotely introdućtory to it, every one of them expreſſed with more or leſs preciſion the real and appointed character. What God had predetermined that the death of Chriſt ſhould be in itſelf, and in its effects, that he partly ſignified by intermediate appointments. Thus the ſacri- fices of Abel, of the Patriarchs, of the Jews, were all but incomplete tranſcripts from it. The ſacrifice of Chriſt was ever the ſole induce- ment with God to grant indemnity i to ſinners; and under a view to that ſacrifice alone, ſacra- mental repreſentations of it, when made with faith in the promiſe, were eſtabliſhed for recon- ciliation. The true nature and effects of the death of Chriſt, whatever God had previouſly or- dained them, would be charaćterized, in part, in the nature and effects of the ſubſequent repre- ſentations. The Promiſe, the Prophecy, and the Sacrifice, as a ſacramental repreſentation of the Great Sacrifice, ſubſiſted together, illuſtrating and confirming, and in part verifying each other; and contributing jointly to form the ground of that faith, without which external obſervances of any kind had no weight or value before God. The ſacrifice of Chriſt ſtands in a light original and Accordingly, Heb. ix. 15. he is ſtiled, “the Mediator of the “new teſtament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the “tranſgreſſions that were under the firſt teſtament, they which are “called might receive the promiſe of eternal inheritance.” See alſo Rom. iii. 25. G 3 exclu- 86 Of the Principle of Religion. excluſively its own; but all other ſacrifices, of divine authority, in a light derived and ſecond- ary, and were real only ſo far as their reſemblance of his ſacrifice could extend. - Hence, even if the Scriptures were ſilent on this point, which, however, appears not to be the caſe, it would ſeem reaſonable in the Apo- ſtles, to explain a ſacrificial appointment of God, ſuch as the death of Chriſt was, from the ſacrifi- cial appointments which God, with the death of his Son ſtill firſt in his mind and determination, authorized, or eſtabliſhed. The ſacrificial terms of the Scriptures were adopted in relation to the death of Chriſt, as charaćterizing that ſacrifice with preciſion and accuracy, but no other. It ſeems, then, that the ſacrificial expreſſions uſed by the Apoſtles were applied to the death of Chriſt, not becauſe they were made familiar to the Jews by former application to the fin- offerings of the law, but rather, becauſe their propriety to denote the ſacrifice of Chriſt had been the very reaſon of their application to the legal ſacrifices for ſin. In a word, there never was but one great object, which the known ſa- crificial terms of Scripture ſtrićtly and properly denoted, and to that objećt, accordingly, the Apoſtles apply them, in the manner they would have done, if there had been no patriarchal or legal ſacrifices to repreſent it. SECTION Of the Principle of Religion, 87 S E C T I O N II. Scriptural views of the death of Chriſt—a judi- cial appointment of God—Chriſt taſted death for every man—his death an expiatory ſin- offering—men reconciled to God thereby—ge- neral reflection. To ſhew that the Chriſtian diſpenſation pro- vides that deliverance from fear of the divine Avenger of fin, which the Gentile had ſought ſo long, but in vain;–and, by obliterating that re- ſervation of puniſhment which the covenant of Moſes had not taken away, reſtores completely that principle of love towards God, on which re- ligion proceeded at firſt, and on which it will proceed, whenever it is perfect and true;—the Scriptural views of the death of Chriſt and its effects may be briefly reduced to the ſubſequent particulars. - I. It was a judicial appointment of God; “that “ he might be juſt, and the juſtifier of him that “believeth in Jeſus.” Of mercy it would have been no violation, if he had arbitrarily remitted the puniſhment of fins paſt; but Divine Righteouſ- neſs diſallowed this impunity. That God “might “be juſt,” he did not, as he declared he would not, make the wicked innocent, or treat the guilty as if they had been guiltleſs; but that he might nevertheleſs be “the juſtifier of him that G 4 “ believeth 88 Of the Principle of Religion. “believeth in Jeſus,” by his decree Chriſt “bare “our fins in his own body on the tree.” Thus the ſcheme of human redemption by the death of the Son of God diſplayed the pcna! as well as the merciful principle, without obſtruction of the one by the other. Accordingly, Chriſt is ſaid to have “ ſuffered for ſin,” and to have “ died unto “ſin ;” and the language of the Apoſtle to the Romans, when cleared from one obſcurity, which the common verſion leaves upon it, ſufficiently indicates in what ſenſe, “God ſending his own “Son in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, and as a ſin- “offering, condemned ſin in the fleſh.” As a particular diſſertation follows reſpecting the pur- poſe of God in the miſſion of his Son, no more will be added here, than that the agony of Chriſt, when all his views and circumſtances are confi- dered, ſeems explicable only upon this principle; that he then lay under that power of darkneſs, to which ſinners would otherwiſe have been ju- dicially delivered. He felt no remorſe, for he knew no fin; he did not ſink under apprehen- ſion of ſufferings, for love of mankind, fortitude, and foreknowledge of his certain triumph and reward, were all then in him at the greateſt; nor ſeems his agony of immediately divine inflićtion, for an angel came to ſtrengthen him. “The “ prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing “in me,” was his own prophetical repreſentation of the conflićt and the vićtory. - II. He taſted death for every man. All the - ſuffer- Of the Principle of Religion. 89. ſufferings in his life and his death were penal inflićtions upon human nature, in conſequence of the fall ; and to them, as ſuch, that is, be- cauſe they had been appointed as puniſhments, he ſubmitted, that they who had incurred them might yet be reſcued from them, and “ that “ through death he might deſtroy him that had “ the power of death.” A ſubmiſſion made to evils really penal, and a vićtory over them ob- tained by one in all reſpects ſuch as Chriſt was, has juſtified God in vouchſafing pardon and eter- nal life to the guilty; to his Juſtice and his Mercy, both of which are undoubted perfections, and cannot intrench upon each other, it has given what reſpectively belonged to them, and made the righteouſneſs of God and the peace of men to kiſs each other. His blood was that ne- ceſſary price and ranſom, by which redemption, even forgiveneſs of ſin, with all its conſequences, was obtained for man. • - III. His death was an expiatory ſin-offering. This was true, without any reſerve, of that ſa- crifice, but of no other. In that alone, the cha- racter of an atoning oblation was completed. Perfeót moral worth in the vićtim, ſubmiſſion to penal ſufferings to which the guilty had been condemned, that ſubmiſſion entirely voluntary, conſent thereto given in circumſtances abſolutely excluſive of all deception in him who accepted it, and of weakneſs in him who gave it, ſeem to accompliſh the character of a piacular ſacrifice, and 90 Of the Principle of Religion. and never were found even ſingle, much leſs united, in any oblation, but that which Chriſt made of himſelf. IV. We are reconciled to God by the death of his Son. This was the end of the promiſe. Since a judicial condemnation of fin lay on the fleſh of Chriſt, that is, was exerciſed in his death ; and ſince death, penally inflićted upon men, was by Chriſt, without ill-deſert of his own, “taſted for every man;” and ſince that death, as a perfect ſacrifice, hath put away ſin; the juſtice of God has not in man that object which it had, and the mercy of God may have in him that object which it had not. Hence at the very time when Jeſus taught his diſciples that “it behoved Chriſt to ſuffer,” he added as the reſult, that “ remiſſion of ſins ſhould be “preached in his name unto all nations.” And under the continual ſupport of a divine miracu- lous power from him in the execution of that commiſſion, the Apoſtles aſſerted the Redemp- tion obtained by his blood. They ſtile it “the “common ſalvation,” and propoſe it with equal cogency to the Gentile and the Jew, with evi- dences ſo accommodated to each of them, as to be fairly concluſive with both. Theſe are very ſhort and general outlines, but ſeem to afford a ſufficient view of the di- vine proviſion for delivering the Gentile from that fear of penal ſuffering for ſin, which had oppreſſed him ſo long and ſo grievouſly, and for • . . effacing Of the Principle of Religion. Q1 effacing that reſervation of puniſhment, which the law of the Jew had ſtill left in force. Here one remedy was offered for the neceſſities of both ; and the former had been condućted by religious perplexities and diſappointments, the latter by a divine diſpenſation avowedly imper- one to truſt in “the Lamb ſlain from the foun- “ dation of the world,” the other to believe that “all the promiſes of God in him are yea, and in “ him Amen.” The principles of both, if pro- perly purſued, would end in bringing them to Chriſt. 4. S E. CT I O N III. Piew of the divine charaćier under the Goſpel— change in the circumſtances and views of man —revolution in the principle of religion. THE charaćter of God is obviouſly placed by the Goſpel in a light oppoſite to that, under which nature, upon the fall, beheld it. As a Saviour, he has removed that terror in which he actually appeared as a Judge ; and has removed it upon a conſideration, that, conſiſtently with his righteouſneſs, afforded a free exerciſe of his mercy. His creatures he never irrevocably aban- doned to that evil which they had deſervedly - incurred; 92 Of the Principle of Religion. incurred; but ſelected and preſerved, from the fall to the appointed “fullneſs of time,” ſuffi- cient witneſſes of his promiſe of human redemp- tion ; and in the mean while, if he left the bulk of human kind to the juſt apprehenſions of his judicial vengeance for ſin, it was only that he might diſpoſe them the more favourably to his purpoſed covenant of mercy. By one part of his providential oeconomy he has recommended his ſalvation to them that were afar off, by another to them that were nigh, and has recon- ciled both to himſelf in one body by the croſs of Chriſt. In conſequence, then, of the cove- nant, of which the blood of Chriſt is the ſeal, God, as its author, characteriſtically appears to the mind of man that amiable Being, “ abun- “dant in goodneſs,” which he had deſcribed himſelf. In ſuch a light the Jews might view him, but by faith, and only in part; but guilt without promiſe of indemnity, which was the eaſe of the Gentiles, beheld him in oppoſite colours. - - In the circumſtances of man alſo the change is ſo complete in all reſpects, that the Apoſtoli- cal writers commonly repreſent redemption and creation by the ſame forms of language. He has no further reaſon to dread puniſhment for fins paſt, for repentance with faith in the blood of the Redeemer is now reckoned unto him for righteouſneſs. He has ſeen mercy rejoicing againſt judgment in his behalf; and is not con- - ſtrained Of the Principle of Religion. 93 ſtrained to fly, like the guilty and fearful Gen- tile, from one diſappointed effort of divine pro- pitiation to another, or to ſubmit, like the Jew, to ceremonial obſervances, exceſſive in number, and limited in effect. He may “ſtand faſt in “ the liberty wherewith Chriſt has made us “free,” and rely on him for that indemnity he ſought ſo long. - In the principle of religion alſo, as in the cha- raēter of God and the circumſtances of man, a ſtriking revolution has taken place. The leading purpoſe of divine worſhip is no longer depreca- tion, for ſin is departed from the door, and, with it, fear of the divine Avenger, its inſeparable attendant, has retired. It is at length caſt out from all influence and power as a principle of religion; “ for we have not received the ſpirit “ of bondage again to fear, but we have re- “ ceived the ſpirit of adoption, whereby we cry, “Abba, Father;” that is, as the ſame Apoſtle ſpeaks in another place, we have received, not “ the ſpirit of fear, but the ſpirit—of love.” Nor will fear of God, in the ſenſe under which it has been here conſidered, ever reſume the ſtation and effect it has loſt, unleſs ſin be recalled to diſſolve that covenant of reconciliation, which the death of Chriſt has eſtabliſhed between God and mankind. “If we fin wilfully after “we have received the knowledge of the truth, “ there remaineth no more ſacrifice for ſin, but “a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and & 6 fiery 94 Of the Principle of Religion. “fiery indignation, which ſhall devour the ad- ** verſaries.” - In the view of the divine charaćter, and in the circumſtances of man, and in the principle of religion, ſuch is the effect of univerſal re- miſſion of fins. This no religious ſcheme, of whatever date or credit, but the Goſpel, has provided; and the want of this, according to all appearances, nature could at no time ſup- port. SECTION IV. Religious principle perfected under the Goſpel by means ſimilar to thoſe which God had au- thorized upon the Fall—By faith in a divine Promiſe—as that Promiſe exceeds any pre- vious Promiſe, proportionably the religious principle is more perfect than before—By an external expreſſion of faith in the Promiſe, viz. a ſacramental ſign of Chriſt's death—eſtimate of the religious principles under the ſeveral ſtates of Religion here conſidered. BUT under the Goſpel, the caſe is capable of a much ſtronger repreſentation. For if this in- demnity of finners has a real effect in removing that fear of God, which the conſciouſneſs of fin - - had Of the Principle of Religion. 95 had left in force, either partly, as in the caſe of the Jew, or totally, as in that of the Gentile; how much more effectually muſt love towards God be reeſtabliſhed by promiſes infinitely more “exceeding great and precious” than nature ever before received If reconciliation to ſinners, ſufficient as it is ſingly to teſtify that the Lord, according to his own proclamation, was merci- ful, gracious, and forgiving, had alone filled up the whole meaſure of divine goodneſs to man- kind, even then it would have appeared great; but how much greater does it appear in their adoption to a joint-inheritance with Chriſt The Divine Being now beholds them in cloſe connection with the Son of his love, who, by the moſt intimate and dear conjunction and intereſt with him, is able, and by the neareſt relation to and affection for man is inclined, to ſave them to the uttermoſt that come unto God by him, not merely as the Miniſter, but as the Author of their ſalvation. “If ye aſk,” ſaith he, “ any “thing in my name, I will do it.” The pardon of our ſins, ſpiritual helps, a right direction of our will and action, and “whatever things per- “tain to life and godlineſs,” are all included in the Promiſe. Upon comparing, then, the Regenerate and the Fallen ſtates of nature together, we ſhall find that Divine Revelation has laid the ſame founda- tion of Faith, and employed ſimilar ſigns in the one as in the other, with that difference only of effect, 90 Of the Principle of Religion. effect, which ſuited the circumſtances of man at the time. I. The foundation of Faith now laid is, as before, a Divine Promiſe ; of which the ſub- ſtance is, that Chriſt will reſtore all believers in him to a ſecond life, if they are dead, becauſe he is the reſurreótion ; and will give them, whether living or dead, eternal life, becauſe he is the life. It was delivered with a perſpicuity, that was proper, when no ſucceeding prophecies were in- tended to throw occaſional illuſtration upon it. Thus Penitence is now conducted as high as In- nocence could poſſibly have aſpired ; and Faith in the divine Promiſe is, as before, the principal condition of the bleſſing. On the difference of the promiſes, then, will depend the difference of the principles, on which they ground religion. The Promiſe of deliver- ance from penal evil has no other immediate tendency, than that of abating the fear of the Di- vine Judge by a reſtoration of love towards him, though it be imperfect; but the promiſe of eternal life, and of all things neceſſary either to facili- tate our attainment of it, or to complete our fe- licity in it, tends as immediately to reinſtate the perfeół principle of religion, that is, to reeſtabliſh love towards God as our Father, without any fear of him as our Judge. II. Of Faith in the Divine Promiſe the exter- nal expreſſion alſo, at preſent appointed, is ſimi- lar to that which God accepted before. To the COIII - Of the Principle of Religion. 9? communicant, Bread and Wine are the Body and Blood of the Redeemer, after his coming, in the ſame ſenſe as, before his coming, ſacrificial blood had been to the offerer. In each of the two periods, the viſible ſigns that ſhewed his death had, on that account, a real and ſacramental vir- tue. At the firſt and at the laſt God authorized a ſtanding repreſentation of the univerſal ſacri- fice, only with that difference of effect which reſpectively ſuited the fallen and reſtored ſtates of nature, and the opening and accompliſhment of his ſcheme of redemption. Faith in the Promiſe of a future Deliverer, and the accepted ſacrifice, as a ſacramental ſign of the future effuſion of his blood, were both of them to the penitent real means of juſtification ; Faith in the ſacrifice which that Redeemer has offered, and in the Promiſe of eternal life which he has given, and the Communion of his body and blood, which he has appointed as a ſacramental ſign of his death, are alſo now real means of preſent grace and final glorification. Uncertain as to the effect which the forego- ing view of the principles of religion, in all the ſtates of it here conſidered, may have on the minds of others, I only aſſign, by way of con- H cluſion, 98 Of the Principle of Religion. cluſion, ſome of the impreſſions it leaves upon my own. Only in the firſt and laſt of theſe ſtates, the criterion of perfection and truth is found ſingly. Only under human Innocence and under the Goſpel diſpenſation, religion upon earth proceeds on the ſame fundamental principle, and on the ſame endearing view of the Divine Being, upon which the religion of the bleſſed in heaven will proceed; and on that account ſtands with it on one footing of adjuſtment to the deſign and ap- probation of God, and to the original and final perfections of man. An approach to this caſe, under the patriarchs and the law, carries a proper and characteriſti- cal evidence of a divine ſcheme, but provi- ſional only and introdućtory to one of greater perfection. The religion of finners, when merely the diſ- ciples of nature, reverſes the caſe, both in the principle, and in the view of the Divine Being, on which it proceeds. The detection of the charaćteriſtical principle ſhews which is falſe, which is true but introduc- tory, which is true and final. ON THE FACTS OF REVELATION, H 2 TO THE READER. THE Divinity of Revelation is a queſtion of moral trial. It is propoſed with evidence ſuffi- cient to render Faith reaſonable, but not with ſo much as to make Unbelief impoſſible. It is, therefore, no juſt cauſe of ſurpriſe, eſpe- cially at a time when Paſſion is more than uſually ôold in aſſuming the name and ſway of Reaſon, that there ſhould be found men, who reſiſt the Evidence, whatever be its ſtrength, and yet ſur- render to a Cavil, whatever be its weakneſs. Indeed, all ſuch condući is, as Chriſt has plainly affirmed, ultimately reſolvable into Will; and remains to be anſwered for as an act of choice. And juſtly ; for the Unbeliever applies greater effort in giving plauſible eacceptions of his own ſome apparent bearing againſt Reve- lation, than would have enabled him, under a * As a very judicious Friend ſuggeſts a doubt reſpecting the pro- priety of the expreſſion, Divinity of Revelation, and Divinity of Pro- phecy, I cannot allow it to paſs without premifing an Apology for it. That Revelation and Prophecy are of or from God, is of courſe my meaning. '• H 3 right I O2 TO THE READER. right mind, and on due enquiry, to aſcertain the unreaſonableneſs of the very eacceptions, to which he calls it reaſonable to ſubmit. But it is not for the ſake of the Cavil itſelf, that he acts in this manner. There were Indul- gences, which he had learned to love : and in- Jtead of controuling Deſire by the ſtrenuous ever- tion of his Rational Powers, he has betrayed them all, and delivered himſelf up a willing vaſſal to Paſſions. They have rendered the Cavil againſt Revelation a favourite with him : they have brought him to ſurmiſe, that there may be no Divine Law to interdić, no Divine Threatening to be dreaded: and as impartial enquiry might overthrow all his ſurmiſes, on that he dares not enter. Aſhamed meanwhile of the part he is aćting, he cannot reſt without ſtrong endeavours to juſtify it. In ſuch a purpoſe, Truth is his Enemy , but the Sophiſm may prove his Friend. That, therefore, becomes his inſtrument ; and he muſt, to keep himſelf in countenance, puſh its ef- ject as ſkilfully and widely as he can. Far other men, it is to be hoped, there are ; of too dignified a ſpirit, to adopt any intereſts againſt the allegiance that is due to Virtue, and to Truth: men, who would evince firmneſs and fairneſs enough to acknowledge, upon reaſonable evidence, the Divinity of Revelation. That To THE READER. IO3 That one of them may be found in Thee, is the hope of my heart: for thy uſe, therefore, I have put together theſe pages, when diſabled for a time from purſuing thoſe occupations, which muſt otherwiſe have engroſſed my attention. If thou haſt long and fully reflected on the ſubjeći, expect not here either novelty or information : enough will it be, if minds, leſs prepared than thine, can poſſibly gather hence any principles of ſafeguard from thoſe inſidious miſrepreſentations, which are now thrown in their way at every turn. H 4 O N T H E FACTS OF REVELATION. PART I. S E CT I O N I. The Fa&s of Revelation were ſenſible fačis—at- teſted with ſome circumſtances of peculiar force —Early events in Iſrael—appeal to that people, as eyewitneſſes of them—inferences from it. TO notify two Divine promiſes, and to exhibit them both under an aſſignable courſe of gradual advancement towards completion, and ultimately under a full accompliſhment, were among the great objects of Revelation. It could not, there- fore, fix only on one point of time, or on a ſingle incident; nor could it affect only the particular and temporary fortunes of detached individuals. It muſt unfold itſelf in a long train of relative occurrences. It muſt conduct a temporal bleſ- ſing to one people, in the firſt inſtance; and a ſpiritual bleſſing to the whole world, in the ſecond. Revelation, then, implies throughout a ſuc- ceſſion of great events; and theſe we may be - allowed I O6 On the Faëts of Revelation. allowed to call the Facts of Revelation. Let us fix our attention upon them, and conſider, at preſent, what light their notoriety throws upon the queſtion of their reality. As to the facts themſelves, we may previouſly obſerve, that, whatever might be the power that produced them, and whatever their character, ſtill they lay, when produced, under the teſt of the common faculties of our nature. The queſ- tion of their reality was, therefore, at all times of eaſy deciſion. They were obječts not ſo much of reaſoning as of ſenſe. Reſpecting all ſenſible facts, it is uſual to ad- mit, as ſufficient evidence, the teſtimony of eye- witneſſes. Early hiſtory and long experience ſtand chiefly on this very ground ; and they are accordingly credited, if no extraordinary reaſons interpoſe to juſtify diſſent. To the full benefit of this general principle the Faëts of Revelation are of courſe entitled. If there ſhould be any, who refuſe ſuch evidence in ſupport of all ancient facts; or who, admitting it in behalf of thoſe, yet reject it when offered for the Facts of Revelation; they muſt juſtify them- ſelves, as they can, to their own minds, and to their God. But that the Faëts of Revelation were aſſerted by eyewitneſſes, however material that conſider- ation may be, forms not, in the preſent inſtance, the whole of the caſe. It muſt here be remarked, that theſe events - were On the Fa&s of Revelation. 107 were not only alleged by eyewitneſſes at the very time of their occurrence; but were aſſerted alſo to a community of men, who were under no neceſſity of truſting to the teſtimony of others, without knowledge of their own, but had per- ſonally ſeen the very things which were aſſerted to them. It muſt alſo be further obſerved, that the events themſelves involved the deepeſt intereſts of every man in that community, to which they were thus aſſerted; and that its riſe and great- neſs, its decline and fall, as a nation, were at the time turning upon them. Both theſe conſiderations ſeem to throw a par- ticular weight into the ſcale. Strong indeed is the caſe, when national aſſent is obtained to facts, which every man had ſeen, and by which every man muſt have been feelingly affected. The early facts, which were aſſerted to Iſrael as real, were briefly theſe :—that they had been brought forth out of bondage in Egypt, and, notwithſtanding the moſt formidable purſuit of the Egyptians, had been ſafely conducted on their way towards the country they ſought—that they had paſſed on into the deſert, ſuffering by hunger, and ſuffering by thirſt, but without bée ing fatally overcome by either—that they had received at the foot of Mount Sinai a Law of moſt extraordinary proviſions, and had with one conſent ſubjected themſelves to it, as their na- tional conſtitution in all ſacred and civil con- CeII]S 1 O& On the Fa&s of Revelation. cerns—that they had journeyed in the deſert from ſtation to ſtation during forty years; and were now arrived on the confines of a vaſt coun- try, the ſeat of their future ſettlement. Theſe events, involving, as they muſt, many other preparatory and attendant occurrences, would ſurely prove, as to number, character, and intereſt, ſo impreſſive, that they muſt have taken, ſuppoſing them to have really occurred, full poſ- ſeſſion of the public mind. And it cannot be conceived, that a whole nation could have been induced by any means whatever to think and act upon all theſe events, as real occurrences in their own times, and before their own eyes, if no ſuch incidents had been preſented on their national ſcene. - How repeatedly and forcibly, however, did one eyewitneſs appeal to all the reſt of Iſrael, as to eyewitneſſes with himſelf of all theſe events “Keep thy ſoul diligently, left thou forget the “ things, which thine eyes have ſeen.”—“Know “ye this day, for I ſpeak not with your chil- “dren, which have not known, and which have “ not ſeen”—“but your eyes have ſeen.”— “This day came ye out from Egypt.”—And again, “I have led you forty years in the wil- “ derneſs.” Theſe were ſome of his appeals a to Iſrael. * See his circumſtantial detail, Deut. i. 6. and in the following chapters. Joſhua made ſimilar appeals. See Joſh. xxiv. 5, &c. He On the Fa&s of Revelation. § 09 He proceeded ſtill further. He impoſed upon every man obligations, which implied a conſtant avowal of theſe events, as real. In one inſtance of dedicated ſolemnity, he gave an univerſal charge; “Thou ſhalt ſhew thy ſon b,”—“ſaying, “This is done, becauſe of that which the Lord “ did unto me, when I came forth from Egypt.” And in another inſtance of perſonal offering, he preſcribed to every individual this profeſſion ; “A Syrian ready to periſh was my father, and “ he went down into Egypt, and ſojourned there “with a few, and became there a nation, great, “mighty, and populous; and the Egyptians"— “ laid upon us hard bondage”—“ and the Lord “brought us forth out of Egypt.” In either of theſe laſt caſes, it would have been at once folly and inſult to give any ſuch direc- tion, if they, who were to obey it as fathers, muſt at the very time know that they were ob- truding a falſehood upon their children; and if they, who were to obſerve it in the act of wor- ſhip, muſt alſo know that the events had never taken place, which they were then owning be- fore God, as real. In all theſe and many like inſtances, national atteſtation was authoritatively demanded, and unreſervedly yielded, to facts of national noto- riety; and the demand on one ſide, and the ac- * See another inſtance, Deut. vi. 7. 20, &c. See alſo Pſalm lxxviii. 3. &c. - knowledg- 1 1 O On the Faëts of Revelation. knowledgment on the other, were equally natu- ral in cotemporary eyewitneſſes of the events concerned. Such was the caſe in the early day of Iſrael. SECTION II. Events in Iſrael at a later time—appeal to the people of that time, as eyewitneſſes of them— remarks on its reſult. AT a later period, an inſtance of ſimilar kind occurred in Iſrael. Twelve men publicly pre- ſented themſelves, and atteſted, as eyewitneſſes, the reality of other very extraordinary facts. The ſubſtance of their teſtimony was this—that John, the ſon of Zacharias and Elizabeth, had appeared publicly, crying, “Repent ye, for the kingdom “ of heaven is at hand;” “One mightier than I “ cometh;” and had initiated diſciples to the Mighty One coming after him, by a baptiſm of water :—that Jeſus ſoon followed, and ſhewed himſelf openly from city to city during ſome years; claimed the title of Son of God; vindi- cated the true meaning of the law from the tra- dition of Elders, and the conſtruction of Scribes; taught principles of a new faith, and a worſhip of a new ſpirit, to aſſembled multitudes; under- went a public arraignment before the Chief Prieſts - and On the Fa&s of Revelation. 1 11 and rulers; had been by them condemned to ſuffer capitally, and was, at their inſtance, put to death by Roman ſoldiers, after the Roman man- 1162T. Theſe again were occurrences ſo capital in their nature, that, if they really had taken place, they muſt have engroſſed the attention of the public : and the very men, under whoſe own eyes it was ſtated that theſe events had fallen, could not have been induced to own them as real, if it had been poſſible for them to object that no ſuch occurrences had ever paſſed under their obſervation. - The men of that generation were, however, often and ſtrongly called forth as eyewitneſſes of all theſe events. John “ was a burning and a “ſhining light, and ye were willing for a ſeaſon “to rejoice in his light,” ſaid our Lord ; and before, “ye ſent unto John, and he bare witneſs “ unto the truth;” and again, “I ever taught “in the ſynagogue and in the temple”—“ they “know what I ſaid.” Such language & implies that the events, to which our Lord referred, were notorious to the people whom he addreſſed. At a ſubſequent period, “Ye men of Iſrael,” ſaid the diſciple Peter, “hear theſe words; Jeſus • Other inſtances of it frequently occur. “From whence hath “ this man theſe things 2 and what wiſdom is that which is given “ unto him " (Matth. vi. 2.) are queſtions, which evidently imply an acknowledgment, that Jeſus had thus publicly delivered his doc- “ of trines. 1 12 On the Faëts of Revelation. “ of Nazareth, a man approved of God among “you”—“ as ye yourſelves alſo know”—“ him” —“ ye have taken, and by wicked hands have “ crucified and ſlain.” Such was the appeal which he made, as an eyewitneſs, to the people, as eyewitneſſes with him of theſe very things. By a ſimilar appeal he drew from the Council a virtual admiſſion of the facts, which he atteſted. “They took knowledge” of him and his compa- nion, “that they had been with Jeſus.” This could be eaſily done; for either to them, or to thoſe whom they conſulted, the public appear- ance, and perhaps the perſon, of Jeſus had been ſufficiently known. - But let us conſider the condućt of the Council ſomewhat more cloſely. - Among the principles, on which the human mind is invariably found to proceed, there is but one, on which it ſeems poſſible to account for that mode of proceeding which they adopted. To deny the reality of events, is one thing; to reſiſt the obligation which they impoſe, is an- other. Theſe parties, and with them nearly all Iſrael, did the latter, when it was moſt to their point to have done the former. Inſtead of de- viſing ſubterfuges from the duty which ſuch events directly tended to enforce, they would, had that been poſſible, have taken a much nearer way to their purpoſe, by denying the facts. They did the only thing in their power. On the perſons, whom they could not charge with an - atteſta- On the Fa&s of Ilevelation. 1 13 atteſtation of falſehood, they impoſed ſilence. A people thus appealed to, and, if we may be al- lowed the expreſſion, challenged as eyewitneſſes to moſt unwelcome events, would have retorted immediate and indignant contradićtion, had not the facts themſelves been in their own know- ledge real. S E CT I O N III. The Fa&s of Revelation further atteſted as real by public memorials—reflections on that at- teſtation. WE may now proceed to another head of con- ſideration. The facts of Revelation, already mentioned, and with them others out of number, inſtead of being treated as unreal, or even doubtful, by the public, under the eye of which it had been af- firmed they fell, afforded at their reſpective times immediate occaſion to the relative ſymbol 4, the d Other inſtances of ſuch public memorials are frequent. What the feaſt of tabernacles denoted, may be ſeen Levit. xxiii. 4o, &c. As to the intention with which the cenſers of Korah's company were made into “broad plates for a covering of the altar,” ſee Numb. xvi. 38, &c. When the covenant was publicly renewed in Shechem, a memorial of the tranſačtion was ſet up. Joſh. xxiv. 26, &c. Why the two names, Maſſah and Meribah, were given to a place by Moſes, ſee Exod, xvii. 7. The valley of Achor was ſo named I from 1 14 On the Facts of Revelation. appropriate name, the ſacred rite, the popular cuſtom, the national monument. “ This ſhall “be a witneſs”—“this ſhall be your memorial” “ —this ſhall be a token”—“ do this in remem- “brance”—was the language of appointment on ſeveral ſuch occaſions. Thus, on the eſtabliſhment of the Horeb-cove- nant, its two tables were conſigned to a conſe- crated repoſitory; and, with other ſacred depoſits of as early date, were found in it by Solomon ſome ages after. So the Paſſover, and the offer- ing of firſt fruits, with many religious ſolemni- ties and feſtivals of Iſrael, and ſo alſo the day of Sabbath, the Communion, the Baptiſm, and many other ritual and feſtal obſervances among Chriſtians, were eſtabliſhed in conſequence of events, with which the appointment of them, as memorials, had been nearly or quite coacval. So again, the new reckoning of the Jews as to the firſt month of their year, and the new rule among Chriſtians for computing centuries, reſpectively took their almoſt immediate riſe from thoſe events, which had given occaſion to them. It cannot be reaſonably imagined, that differ- ent generations of men ſhould thus with one conſent have inſtituted ſuch memorials, to imply that certain national events had taken place in from the trouble and defeat which Iſrael had undergone. See Joſh. vii. 24. Why a particular field was called Aceldama, ſee Aćts i. 19. their On the Fa&s of IRevelation. 11 5 their own times, and under their own eyes; and have uniformly treated the memorial, as a dedi- cated thing, intended to commemorate at ſtated periods ſome relative event, as admitted to have been notoriouſly real; if it had been ſtill in the power of the community to object, that no ſuch event had occurred. The combination of men in every age to witneſs by public eſtabliſhments of their own, that certain things, which they knew to be falſe, were notwitliſtanding the things which they would record as true, can hardly be pronounced poſſible. And, whilſt national memorials, of every ſort, had been from the firſt and were ſtill ſubſiſting, to atteſt the reality and antiquity, and often the very date and circumſtances, of the relative events, and had from generation to generation been underſtood to bear ſuch an atteſtation ; there could be no ground to ſurmiſe, that the events themſelves were only pretended, and falſe- ly attributed to an early period by ſome inventor in an after-age. For inſtance—By men of a later time it could not be juſtly reputed a newly-deviſed ſtory, either that Iſraeli had ſojourned in the wilderneſs with- out any ſettled habitation; or that they had paſſed on foot from one ſide of the river Jordan to the other on coming into Canaan. For the feaſt of tabernacles had notoriouſly been inſtituted, and annually obſerved, to witneſs the ſojourning of Iſrael in the deſert, without finding “a city to I 2 “ dwell 116 On the Facts of Revelation. “ dwell in ;” and the pile of twelve ſtones in Gilgal had been ſtanding, as a memorial of their paſſing thus through the river Jordan, from the very date of the event. - The ſame too may be ſaid as to many other national occurrences, which had either given a characteriſtical turn to the ceremonial ſervices of the ſanctuary, or had imparted ſome expreſſive peculiarities to popular uſage, and thrown a cor- reſpondent colour over Jewiſh life. Equally groundleſs muſt have been any late ſuſpicion, that the ſtory of Chriſt's death had been deviſed by ſome inventor in the ſecond century of the Chriſtian aera. For the commu- nion of his body and blood, in commemoration of that event, had notoriouſly ſubſiſted among Chriſtians, almoſt from the very time when the miniſtry of Chriſt concluded. And the ſame re- mark may be applied to many other eſtabliſhed ſolemnities of the Chriſtians. All theſe memorials had carried down with them from age to age the evidence of their own original meaning and early eſtabliſhment; and had continued to bear invariably the conſtruction at firſt fixed upon them. Every thing had gone in a train : and no point of time can be aſſigned, at which late impoſture could begin. SECTION On the Faëls of Revelation. 117 SECTION IV. The Faëls of Revelation atteſted by two records— the one, under the completion of God’s promiſe to Iſrael—the other, under that of his promiſe to all nations. - THERE yet remains another head of conſidera- tion. For neither the admiſſion of the Facts of Revelation in every age, when alleged by eye- witneſſes to the public, as a body of eyewitneſſes; nor the national memorial of various kinds; were intended to be the only atteſtations, which thoſe facts were to carry with them, in proof of their reality. To both of theſe acceded a written record : and this was always growing up into a body, as the incidents, which were to conſtitute the ſub- jećt-matter of it, ſucceſſively paſſed. “Is it not “ written in the book of Iddo P”—“Is it not “ written in the book of Gad "-" Is it not “written in the book of Ahjah "-" Is it not “ written in the book of Samuel 2’-are ſome of the appeals continually made to exiſting and ac- credited hiſtories of national events, and proba- bly to component portions of this very public record. Here, then, comes in another and nearly a coaval witneſs to the ſeveral events, in which I 3 the 1 18 On the Fačís of Revelation. the completion of the promiſe to Iſrael was manifeſted. It detailed the various ſteps of that ſucceſsful enterprize, by which their ſettlement in the land of Canaan was obtained. It was the charter of their poſſeſſions in it, and ſet out the claim and the border inviolably between tribe and tribe. It yielded a new ſanétion to every public memorial of another ſort, that ſubſiſted; and in caſes where there was none, it was in it- ſelf a ſufficient memorial, to atteſt the reality of national events, as they enſued. It was a re- gifter of deſcents, to mark the lines of the Jewiſh prieſthood, and of the univerſal promiſe. It was ever bearing teſtimony to Moſes, as the leader, lawgiver, and prieſt of Iſrael; by exem- plifying e a conſtitution, which it confeſſedly aſcribed to him ; and by ſtating the execution of * Appointments made by him were carried into execution by Joſhua, in the following among many inſtances. As to ſetting up on the Ca- naan-ſide of Jordan an altar, and ſtones inſcribed with the words of the law, compare Deut. xxvii. 4, &c. with Joſhua viii. 3o, &c.—As to the ſix cities of refuge, compare Numb. xxxv. 6, &c. with Joſh. xx. 1, &c.—As to the aſſignment of Hebron to Caleb, as his privileged portion, compare Numb. xiv. 23, 24. Deut. i. 36. with Joſh. xiv. 12, 13, &c.—The ſabbath of the ſeventh year (Levit. xxiv. 4, &c.) and the jubilee of the fiftieth year (Levit. xxiv. 9, &c.) were inſtitu- tions reſerved under the order of Moſes for future effect in Canaan. —The two tribes of Reuben and Gad, and half the tribe of Manaſ- ſeh, derived their title to the ſpecial inheritance, which they had, from the gift of Moſes; but the other nine tribes and a half had their inheritance by lot. Compare Numb. xxxii. 33. Deut. iii. 12, &c. with Joſh. xiii. 8, &c. reli- On the Faëis of Revelation. 119 religious appointments, reſerved under his com- mand for future effect in Canaan; by referring to what he had ſaid and done, as a ſanction; by appealing to his writings, as the national law f ; and by inſtancing at times the public produćtion” of them ; in a word, it implied, as real h, the great events ſet forth by Moſes, and authenti- cated his Pentateuch. So alſo it atteſted the elevation, and acts, of every one who followed Moſes in delivering, leading, and judging Iſrael; and it bore teſti- mony to the coming, and ſet forth the very lan- guage, of many meſſengers from God. And during the interval between the age of Moſes, and the cloſe of the ſacred canon of Iſrael, conti- nual acknowledgment was kept up of this re- cord, in all its preceding parts, and unintermitted reference was made to it, in ſubſequent portions f See ſome inſtances, 2 Chron. xxiii. 18. xxiv. 6.9. xxx. 16. xxxv. 12. Ezra iii. 4, &c. vii. 6. Nehem. ix. I4. x. 29. * Joſhua “read all the words of the law, the bleſfings and curſ- “ings, according to all that is written in the book of the law. There “was not a word of all that Moſes commanded, which Joſhua read “ not before all the congregation of Iſrael." Joſh. viii. 34.—The Princes and Levites, by order from Jehoſaphat, “taught in Judah, “ and had the book of the law of the Lord with them, and went “ about through all the cities of Judah, and taught the people.” 2 Chron. xvii. 7, &c.—When Joaſh was crowned King, they gave him the teſtimony, that is, the copy of the Law in a book. Compare Deut. xvii. 18. with 2 Chron. xxiii. I I.—See alſo 2 Chron. xxxiv. I 5, &c. Ezra iii. 4. Nehem. viii. 2. I4. ix. 3. xiii. 1. * See Joſh. xxiv. 5, &c. 1 Sam. xii. 8. I Kings viii. 2 I. 51, 52, 53. Nehem. ix. 9, &c. Pſalm lxxviii. 12, &c, cv. 26, &c. cwi, 7, &c. I 4 of I 20 On the Facts of Revelation. of Iſraelitiſh ſtory, and in every book of prophe- tical communications. - In the ſame manner, when the divine promiſe to all nations was brought into accompliſhment, there came in, as an attendant witneſs, a written record. It detailed the progreſſive events, in which the completion of that univerſal promiſe lay. It ſtated the offer of the Goſpel to Jews, that were not idolaters, and to Gentiles that were. It named the parties that acted, and aſ- ſigned the places, extent, and effects of their agency. And to this circumſtantial hiſtory have alſo been added the letters of perſons, whom it had named as principals in condućting the great concern ;-letters, formed upon, and more or leſs referring to, the ſubſtance and matter of the hiſtorical detail. - And, as this laſt body of written record at- teſted the Facts of Revelation, as they enſued; ſo alſo it reflected an atteſtation on the accounts antecedently given of all that Chriſt had taught and done, ſuffered and ordained. From the whole of this it iſſued, as an evidently derived ſequel— from all this, as a ſource, it drew the matters of doctrine, and the principles of faith, of which it ſtated the univerſal diffuſion—from all this it took the foundation, upon which the ſeveral proceedings, which it detailed, ſucceſſively roſe. In ſhort, it implied throughout the reality of the very facts, which the Goſpel-hiſtories attribute to the miniſtry of Chriſt. This On the Faëls of Revelation. 121 This written record is alſo, in all its parts, ap- pealed to and recognized through the ſubſequent periods of the Chriſtian age. SECTION V. Concluſion of the Firſt Part. ON conſidering thus far the Facts of Revela- tion, we have ſeen what very peculiar circum- ſtances notoriety, in their caſe, implies. We have found them in every age, as they occurred, aſſerted by eyewitneſſes; and, when aſſerted by them to the public of the time, as to another body of eyewitneſſes, not queſtioned as doubt- ful, not diſclaimed as fićtitious, but admitted as notoriouſly real. We have found their noto- rious reality further atteſted by coacval memo- rials, and ſtill further by coaval records. We have ſeen alſo that the facts and the records were owned and recognized in every ſubſequent age. Can we elſewhere diſcover, in the whole com- paſs of detailed occurrence, any atteſtation of ſuch extent and power, of ſuch accumulation and perpetuity ? No: to events, though real, it is annexed but in part: that events, if only pre- tended, may poſſeſs it completely, ſeems quite impoſſible either for human hiſtory to ſhew, or the 1 22 On the Fačís of Revelation. the human mind to conceive. What, then, can there be any reaſon to believe, if there be not enough to entitle the Facts of Revelation to be credited as real 2 oN O N T H E FA CTS OF REVELATION. PART II. SECTION I. Notoriety of Revelation-Facts implies more than reality—light in which they were preſented— Reflections on the reſult—Public memorials ea:- emplified, as atteſting more than reality of fact —reflections on theſe two heads. We have already ſeen how far the notoriety of the Faëts of Revelation affects the queſtion of their reality; and we may now proceed to conſider what further meaning that notoriety may imply. It ſeems indeed that there is a ſenſe ſtill more extenſive, in which it may be applied to the Fa&ts of Revelation. For it is certain, that when they were alleged to the public, as real events, this was not the only light, in which they were preſented. “Ye have ſeen,” ſaid Moſes to all Iſrael, “all that the Lord did before your eyes in “ the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all “ his ſervants, and unto all his land ; the great “ temptations I 24 On the Facts of Revelation. “temptations which thine eyes have ſeen, the “ſigns, and thoſe great miracles.”—“what he “ (the Lord) did unto the army of Egypt, unto “ their horſes, and to their chariots; how he “ made the water of the Red Sea to overflow “ them as they purſued after you, and how the “Lord hath deſtroyed them unto this day”— “your eyes have ſeen.”—“the Lord thy God “ led thee theſe forty years in the wilderneſs”— “who brought thee forth water out of the rock “ of flint ; who fed thee in the wilderneſs with “ manna”—“ the Lord your God, who went in “ the way before you, to ſearch you out a place “ to pitch your tents in, in fire by night, to “ ſhew you by what way you ſhould go, and “in a cloud by day”—“what he did unto Da- “ than and Abiram”—“how the earth opened “ her mouth, and ſwallowed them up”—“ in the “ midſt of all Iſrael”—“ your eyes have ſeen”— “ did ever people hear the voice of God”—“ as “ thou haſt heard”—“ out of heaven he made “ thee to hear his voice”—“ thou heardeſt his “ words out of the midſt of the fire.” Thus, in alleging the ſeveral facts, he unre- ſervedly inſiſted upon the point of divine inter- poſition, as no leſs notoriouſly aſcertained in them, than that of reality. / Indeed, on the notoriety of all this, as miracu- lous, he relied ſo confidently, as to impoſe an obligation upon fathers, to inculcate the whole of it, not only as fact but alſo as miracle, upon their On the Faëls of Revelation. 125 their children. “Thou ſhalt ſay unto thy ſon, “We were Pharaoh's bondmen in Egypt, and the “Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty “hand : and the Lord ſhewed ſigns and won- “ders great and ſore upon Egypt, upon Pha- “raoh, and upon all his houſehold, before our “eyes.” He went even further; and preſcribed it as a point of religious duty, to own the whole of this before God, as a courſe of his wonderful works. “Thou ſhalt go unto the prieſt”—“ and “ſay unto him, I profeſs this day unto the Lord “ thy God,”—“ the Lord brought us out of “ Egypt with a mighty hand, and with an out- “ſtretched arm, and with great terribleneſs, and “with ſigns, and with wonders: and he hath “brought us into this place.” To preſcribe ſuch an unqualified acknowledg- ment of miracle, as the ſubſtance either of pa- rental inſtruction or of profeſſion before God, would have been at once inſulting and nugatory, if in the whole of what muſt be thus inculcated on children and avowed before God, as miracu- lous, both reality and miracle had not been no- toriouſly and inconteſtably combined. The peo- ple, however, acted without obječtion upon the two injunctions of Moſes. And as other mira- culous events were ſucceſſively coming forth on the public ſcene, one generation after another, not ſolely on the teſtimony of their immediate fathers, but alſo on knowledge of their own daily accruing, gave national atteſtation to them, as notoriouſly 126 On the Faëls of Revelation. notoriouſly at once facts and miracles; and upon them, as ſuch, they then formed their princi- ples, reſted their faith, and built their hope : and thcir poſtcrity has done the ſame from that day to this. Other facts alſo, at a later time, were preſented to Iſrael preciſely in the ſame light. It was then alleged, that before their own eyes, during ſome years, and at various times, Jeſus of Nazareth had appeared in many of their cities, reſtoring at will eyes to the blind, feet to the lame, hearing to the deaf, ſpeech to the dumb, health to the ſick, and life to the dead. “ Ye men of Iſrael, “hear theſe words ; Jeſus of Nazareth, a man “ approved of God among you, by miracles, and “wonders, and ſigns, which God did by him “ in the midſt of you, as ye yourſelves alſo “know,” were the words of an eyewitneſs, al- leging to the people, as to joint eyewitneſſes, that the works of Jeſus ſtood in notoriety among them, as undoubted miracles. It was, indeed, the real caſe : for “ the multitude wondered, “when they ſaw the dumb to ſpeak, the maim- “ed to be whoſe, the lame to walk, and the “blind to ſee.” And “this man doeth many “miracles,” was the confeſſion of the Jewiſh Council reſpecting Jeſus. In the caſe of a mighty work performed by two of his diſciples, they could not avoid a ſimilar acknowledgment; “ that indeed a notable miracle hath been done “ by them, is manifeſt to all them that dwell in - “ Jeru- On the Faćts of Revelation. 127 “ Jeruſalem ; and we cannot deny it.” It was the language of truth, breaking forth at the very moment of their conſpiracy to defeat the effect of the miracle. Their hearts yielded acknow- ledgment; it was their will that reſiſted. And in rejecting a Divine atteſtation, implied in works, which were in their own judgment miraculous, lay at once their folly and their crime. Thus in two diſtinct periods, the great facts, on which Revelation proceeded towards the com- pletion of both the Divine promiſes, had paſſed into public notoriety, as miraculous. The only difference was, that the ſame people acted upon them, as miracles, in the firſt inſtance, but would not in the ſecond. We may now turn to another head of reflec- tion. The ſacred rite, the relative ſymbol, the ap- propriate name , the popular cuſtom, the pub- lic monument, had been, as I before obſerved, expreſsly appointed as ſigns, memorials, and tokens of national events. But we may now i Moſes called a place Taberah, (i.e. burning,) becauſe there the people were conſumed by the fire of the Lord. Numb. xi. 3, &c. The cenſers of Korah's company were made “broad plates for a co- “vering of the altar,”—“to be a memorial unto the children of Iſrael, “ that no ſtranger, which is not of the ſeed of Aaron, come near to “offer incenſe before the Lord, THAT HE BE NOT as KoRAH AND “His company ;" Numb. xvi. 38. &c. i. e. left the Lord make again a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and ſwallow them \lp. further 128 On the Fašís of Revelation. further remark, that many of theſe were inſti- tuted for the purpoſe of atteſting, that the event, to which they reſpectively bore relation, had been notoriouſly miraculous, as well as notori- ouſly real. - Thus the Paſſover, and the rite of redeeming the firſtborn, had been at firſt eſtabliſhed, and were ever confidered, as ſacred teſtimonies, that the deſtroying Angel of God had ſmitten in one night all the firſtborn of Egypt, and had then exerciſed a ſpecial forbearance towards the fami- lies and dwellings of Iſrael. Thus too a meaſure of manna was laid up be- fore the teſtimony to preſerve the remembrance of that great and continued act of Divine power, by which, in the barren wilderneſs, and during forty years, the ſupply of food for Iſrael had been ſpread nightly, like dew, upon the ground. . Thus again, the rod of Aaron, on which had been produced in one night the bloom and the almond, was depoſited in the Tabernacle, as a teſtimony that God had thus, by miracle, au- thenticated. Aaron as High-Prieſt. So again, the pile of twelve ſtones in Gilgal had been ſet up as a memorial, to atteſt that the waters of the river Jordan had been miraculouſly divided, and that its exhauſted channel had yielded a pathway to Iſrael on entering Canaan. Thus too, the firſt day of the week, and more particularly one ſtated day in the year, have been from the earlieſt time ſolemnized among Chriſ- tians, On the Fa&s of Revelation. 129 tians, as memorials of Chriſt's miraculous reſur- rection from the dead. So again, another day is annually dedicated by them, to commemorate the miraculous deſcent of the Holy Spirit. We may diſmiſs the two preceding heads with the following obſervation. The events, in which Revelation was holding its courſe, paſſed, both as facts and as miracles, into the ſame notoriety among a community of cotemporary eyewitneſſes; and received, as at Once real and miraculous occurrences, the coasval atteſtation of manifold memorials. That facts, which thus took place at different periods during a ſucceſſion of time, ſhould all have been ſo publicly and ſo uniformly atteſted, yet without having been miraculous as they were avowed to be, may juſtly appear in itſelf an event ſo wonderful, that it ought to be pro- nounced leſs credible, than any miracle among them. And beſides, if the queſtion as to reality of occurrence ought in reaſon to be determined in favour of theſe Facts of Revelation, they did and they muſt decide the queſtion, as to Divine inter- poſition, for themſelves. Reality and miracle were, in their fingular caſe, coincident things. What they were by all Iſrael and at all times known to be, that they were in both reſpects, or in neither. SECTION . K. 13 O On the Faëls of Revelation. SECTION II. Iſritten record not merely a hiſtory of paſſing facts—Prophetical views of impending events— motoriety of Divine interpoſition founded on predictions of this caſt. WE may now advance to another head of conſideration. For, though national notoriety among eyewitneſſes in ſucceſſive generations, and public memorials of every ſort, would in themſelves be ſufficient to place the Facts of Revelation in the light of indiſputable miracles; yet was it intended to accompany theſe atteſta- tions with ſtill further evidence of Divine inter- poſition. To both of them acceded, as I obſerved be- fore, a written record. This became a new, and, as it grew up into a body at ſucceſſive pe- riods, a coacval witneſs of national events, as notoriouſly real. It atteſted every public me- morial, which had been ſet up ; and if none ſubſiſted, it yielded in itſelf a ſufficient memo- rial. But it may now be further obſerved, that more than this is herein implied. For to the impor- tant purpoſes above-mentioned the record would have proved fully adequate, had it exhibited ſimply a narrative of events, as they advanced into On the Fa&s of Revelation. 131 into occurrence. But it had been from the firſt aſſuming a caſt entirely diſtinguiſhing, and to which no hiſtory of recent fact can, as ſuch, ever pretend. For as the men, who at times ei- ther condućted or recorded the public affairs of Iſrael, frequently bore a prophetical character, and in the exerciſe of it predićted national events both nearly and remotely ſubſequent ; their prophecies were either interwoven in the record itſelf, or incorporated with it k into one Scriptural canon. Hence the record acquired a relation not only to the paſt, but alſo to the future; and it involved a hiſtory of national facts with a code of national prophecies. And it appears, that as the hiſtorical parts of the record aſcertain the notoriety of fact, ſo alſo the prophetical portions of it evince the notoriety of Divine interpoſition. “ Take up,” ſaid Jehu to his captain concerning Jehoram whom he had ſlain, “ and caſt him in the por- “tion of the field of Naboth the Jeſreelite ; for “ remember how that when thou and I rode “ together after Ahab his father, the Lord “laid this burthen upon him ; Surely I have “ ſeen yeſterday the blood of Naboth, and the * It might have been added, that they were referred to in the record. Of Zedekiah it was ſtated, that he “humbled not himſelf “ before Jeremiah the Prophet ſpeaking from the mouth of the “Lord." 2 Chron. xxxvi. 12. See another inſtance, as to Iſaiah, 2 Chron, xxxii. 20. |K 2 ‘‘ blood 132 On the Fačis of Revelation. “ blood of his ſons, ſaith the Lord ; and I will “ requite thee in this plat, ſaith the Lord.” So again; “What title is that that I ſee " ſaid Jo- fiah, after he had polluted and broken down the idolatrous altar in Bethel : “ and the men of the “city told him, It is the ſepulchre of the man of “God, which came from Judah, and proclaimed “ theſe things that thou haſt done againſt the “altar of Bethel.” The predictions, referred to in both theſe inſtances, occur in a former part of the record. It would be eaſy to ſhew by accumulated inſtances, that prophecies, whether recited or referred to in the body of the record, or incorporated with it in one ſacred canon, ſtood in equal notoriety, as communications un- doubtedly divine. - But let us proceed to take ſome particular view of the prophetical parts of the record: and let * See in what explicit terms Caleb refers to a predićtion of Moſes reſpecting himſelf. Joſh. xiv. 6, &c. compared with Numb. xiv. 24. 3o. Deut. i. 36. 38.—It was ſaid of Baaſha, that he had ſmitten every one that breathed of the houſe of Jeroboam, “according unto “ the ſaying of the Lord, which he ſpake by his ſervant Ahijah.” I Kings xv. 29.-Zimri was ſaid to have deſtroyed all the houſe of Baaſha, “ according to the word of the Lord, which he ſpake againſt “Baaſha by Jehu the prophet.” I Kings xvi. 12.—Jeroboam the fecond “reſtored the coaſt of Iſrael, from the entering in of Hamath “ unto the ſea of the plain, according to the word of the Lord God “ of Iſrael, which he ſpake by the hand of his ſervant Jonah." 2 Kings xiv. 25—It was a common remark in the record upon any ſucceſs of Iſrael, that it took place in conſequence of what Moſes had Promiſed by divine command. See one inſtance, Joſh. xi. 23. liS On the Fa&s of I'evelation. 133 us fix it firſt upon predićtions of events nearly ſubſequent, with the inſtant, or place, or agent, of completion ſtated. Prophecies of this ſort were very frequently interwoven in the body of the hiſtorical narra- tive; and they form one of its ſtriking and pe- culiar characters. “ Behold,” ſaid Moſes, “to- “ morrow about this time I will cauſe it to rain a very grievous hail”—“ behold, to-morrow “will I bring the locuſts"—and again : “Thus “faith the Lord, About midnight will I go “out into the midſt of Egypt, and all the firſt- “born in the land of Egypt ſhall die”—and again: “The Lord ſhall give you in the even- “ing fleſh to eat, and in the morning bread “ to the full.” Forty years were alſo fixed as the period, in the courſe of which that multitude, from twenty years old and upwards, which came out from Egypt, ſhould all, except Caleb and Joſhua, wander and die in the wilderneſs. And afterwards, in the times of thoſe who either judged Iſrael, or reigned in Jeruſalem or Sama- ria, the record continually in gave out prophetical notices of the ſame caſt. Thus, that under the ſon of Solomon ten tribes ſhould revolt—that Ahab ſhould fall at Ramoth—that the children of Jehu ſhould poſſeſs the kingdom to the fourth * See other inſtances, Judg. iv. 9. xx. 28. 1 Sam. ii. 34. 2 Sam. vii. 12. I Kings xx. 22. 2 Kings xiii. 19. xix. 32. 2 Chron. xx. 14, &c. xxi. I 2. K 3 genera- 134 On the Fa&s of Revelation. generation—were among the prophetical intima- tions of this ſort, which the record contained. And thus again, to name but one inſtance more ; “To-inorrow about this time ſhall a meaſure of “fine flour be ſold for a ſhekel”—“ in the gate “ of Samaria,” ſaid Eliſha to the city, when ſtruggling, without the leaſt hope, under ſiege and famine. In like manner, when the univerſal promiſe was come under a courſe of completion, the re- cord ſtill contained ſimilar predićtions. Thus it recites prophetical intimations, that, out of twelve choſen followers of Jeſus, one ſhould betray him, all ſhould forſake him, and one thrice deny him ; that his crucifixion ſhould take place at Jeruſalem ; that his reſurreótion from the dead ſhould enſue on the third day after his death ; that he ſhould ſhew himſelf alive again in Galilee; that his aſcenſion to heaven ſhould be viſible; and that within the period of that very generation the temple and ſtate of Iſrael ſhould fall. Theſe and many other impending events were ſtated in that part of the record to have been particularly foretold. .* Whether ſuch prophetical intimations as theſe had been or not delivered antecedently to the reſpective events, was a queſtion of fact, which the public of the day could eaſily decide. And that no ſuch prophetical declarations of ap- proaching events had been given, would cer- tainly have been the inſtant and fatal objection, If On the Fačis of Revelation. 1 35 if the previous delivery of them had not paſſed, like any other fact, into public notoriety. Ac- cordingly, among the perſons whom the more ancient parts of the record place in a forward point of view, many there are, who confeſs without reſerve, that predićtions of this caſt had really been delivered. And the words of the Jews under a later period of the record, “We “ remember that that deceiver ſaid, while he was “yet alive, After three days I will riſe again,” evidently ſhew that the caſe was preciſely the ſame as to them. From predićtions of this claſs, even when taken ſeparately from prophecies of remote events, it became a point of national notoriety, that in ſuch inſtances it was God who ſpoke by the prophet as his inſtrument. And it is not rea- ſonable to ſuppoſe, that the reſult could have been different. For ſuch predićtions placed the record under the appearance of claiming from the public the credit of a Divine communication at every turn. They repreſented it as having ex- poſed itſelf notoriouſly to a perpetual danger of diſagreement with impending events, and thoſe ſpecially fixed as to the time, or place, or inſtru- ment of occurrence. They implied it to have maintained credit by no leſs a thing, than the notorious correſpondence of a great number of facts, with as many predictions of the thing and the time, the place and the agent. This was in-, deed a light, which the preſcience of God, ſup- K 4 poſing 136 On the Facts of Revelation. poſing him a party to the record, might unre- ſervedly aflume. But to ſo much as this, impoſ- ture would never have pretended. Leſs than this might poſſibly have anſwered its purpoſe: and it would not have multiplied dangers to itſelf, by undertaking more than it might need; and by perpetually venturing to foretel events, and even to name the moments, the places, the inſtru- ments of their occurrence, when it could not be ſure as to any one point of the four. It was God only that might hazard all, and yet no where fail. SECTION III. Prophetical views of remote events—two predic- tions of Moſes—evidences of Divinity accrued to them in conſequence of their ſubſequent re- petition—Notoriety of Divine interpoſition re- ſulted from them—this actually exemplified— feflection. LET us now turn to prophecies of another claſs; to thoſe which related to events and pe- riods of remote futurity. The written record, under the latter of its two characters, that of a prophetical code, be- came the depoſitary of the Divine promiſe to all nations. With prophetical views of this it had opened ; and almoſt to its very cloſe it ſtill kept them On the Fa&s of Revelation. 137 them up ; and other prophecies, incorporated with it in one canon, continued to reveal during a long interval more and more of the great Di- vine ſcheme, till the record entered again upon the ſtory of its accompliſhment in the latter days. In the courſe of that interval, it preſented to the public eye perſons and periods, places and things; the enterpriſes, victories, and defeats, of chiefs and ſovereigns; the cuſtoms, manners, and religion, of cities and nations; the riſe, ſucceſſion, and fall of empires, through divers portions of the globe, and all ſucceſſions of time. z From ſo vaſt a ſcene let us ſelect three pro- phecies, delivered by Moſes. - In the general affembly of his people, he pre- dićted, “The Lord thy God will raiſe up unto “ thee a prophet, of thy brethren, from the midſt “ of thee, like unto me.” Reſpecting the language of this prophecy we may make one obvious remark. That two men partake of the ſame nature, and that two pro- phets are ſent by the ſame God, is leſs than we mean, when we ſay, in either caſe, that they are alike. The attribute of likeneſs ſprings not from general and common characteriſtics, but from particular and diſtinguiſhing properties. To have received from God, by perſonal communication with him face to face, and to have brought down to his people, as mediator between God and them, a covenant of Divine promiſes, and a ſyſtem 1 38 On the Fa&s of Revelation. ſyſtem of religion; and to have held the prieſt- hood and the rule in it: theſe were the capital diſtinétions of Moſes. And every one among ſubſequent prophets, in whom theſe high prero- gatives did not again meet, muſt be deemed, for that very reaſon, unlike to Moſes, however re- ſembling him in other general points. Again: Moſes delivered another prophetical intimation, when he ſtated theſe as the words of God: “I will move them to jealouſy with thoſe “ which are not a people; I will provoke them “ to anger with a fooliſh nation;"—and after- wards more directly ; “Rejoice, O ye nations, “ with his people.” This prophetically referred to the promiſed bleſſing of all nations, under which the Gentiles were to be received, no leſs than Iſrael, as the people of God. Theſe two prophecies may be taken in con- junction, as the former predićts the coming of the future prophet; and the latter foretels one of its great effects. On both theſe prophecies of Moſes much of the prophetical code is really a comment. From the coming, the prerogatives, and the acts of one extraordinary prophet, it principally derived its illuſtrious and affecting theme. Him it charac- terized as the great juſtifying and ſaving Prieſt, and the enlightening Prophet; him it ſtiled the Meſſenger, not of a covenant according to that by Moſes, but of a covenant new, and his own ; him it introduced as calling the Gentiles, and as fought, On the Fa&s of Revelation. 1 39 fought, ſucceſsfully ſought, by the nations, the iſles, and their multitude, that, till then, knew him not ; him it repreſented as bearing the glo- ry, the government, and the rule in his king- dom; and to him, in all his tranſcendent offices, it aſcribed the incommunicable attributes of uni- verſality and eternity. How vain, then, muſt it be to ſeek in any one, except in him alone, and in his miſſion, powers, and operations, a full and complete object for theſe prophecies of Moſes And when Malachi, after he had repeated the prophecy of his com- ing, yet added, “Remember ye the law of Mo- “ſes,” it was plain that, when the canon of Jewiſh Scripture was cloſed, he remained ſtill an object of future expectation. And ſo he conti- nued indeed till ſome further ages had paſſed. During a period, then, of fifteen centuries, this great prophecy was from time to time held up to national notoriety. It kept accordingly an entire poſſeſſion of it during that time, and through four ſubſequent centuries, in which all exerciſe of the prophetical office was ſuſpended. But into this notoriety the prophecy paſſed, not barely as an eventual teſt of divine fore- knowledge, but alſo as a prediction, the divinity and truth of which ſtood already atteſted by ſa- tisfactory meaſures of evidence. It was repeated by prophets, many of whom had been indiſputably accredited by the punctual 3CCOIIl- 14 O On the Fa&s of Revelation. accompliſhment of their other prophecies n. This was the caſe of Iſaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel: of Amos, Hoſea, Micah, and Zechariah. When men, whom God had demonſtrably proved to have propheſied under his preſcience, by hav- ing put his power in operation to verify their predićtions, thus concurred in repeating, under various but all reconcileable views of it, this pre- diction of the great Prophet to come, it was a reaſonable and perhaps almoſt an unavoidable concluſion, that they had in this inſtance no leſs than in others ſpoken, as they profeſſed, by the word of the Lord. - But the meaſures of that evidence, which tended to render the divinity of this predićtion a point of notoriety, enlarged themſelves ſtill further from time to time. For that evidence of Divine interpoſition, which prophecies of remote events yield, is not wholly reſerved to diſtant futurity. It does not com- mence and reſult only from the great final event. Nor can the period between the time of their delivery, and that of their full accompliſhment, be juſtly deemed an interval entirely unrelated to them, and unproductive as to evidence of Di- vine communication to the prophet. * See Iſ. xxxvii. 7. 21, &c. Jerem. xxi. 7. xxvii. 3. 6, 7. xxviii. I6, 17. 19, 20, 21, 22. xxxvii. 7. xlvi. 24, 25, 26. li. 28. Ezek. xxvi. 7, &c. xxix. 19. Dan. iv. 24. v. 28. xi. 2, &c. Amos vii. 17. Płoſea i. 4. Micah i. 6. iv. Io. Zech. i. 16. viii. 8. - In On the Fa&s of Revelation. 1 4 1 In repeating this prediction of Moſes, ſubſe- quent prophets had gradually combined with it fo much of intermediate occurrence, ſo much of preliminary and introdućtory circumſtance, as to put it in the power of ſeveral remarkable events, to evince by ſome accruing teſtimony the divi- nity of the prophecy. Thus in the caſe now before us, the prediction had been brought into a degree of connection with the following among other circumſtances: that the city of Babylon ſhould be taken, and ſome very ſignal incidents attend its capture, and the Babylonian kingdom be ſubverted, by Cy- rus; that the kingdom of Perſia next, and then the kingdom of Graecia, ſhould in that ſucceſſion riſe, decline, and fall; that, as it were on the ruins of theſe three, a fourth kingdom ſhould erect itſelf, ſurpaſſing them all in greatneſs and power; and that, under this ſtate of that fourth kingdom, the God of heaven would ſet up his univerſal and everlaſting kingdom under Meſſiah the Prince. Could any man know, that Babylon had been taken with all the ſingular circumſtances pre- viouſly ſpecified, and its kingdom ſubverted, by Cyrus; that his Perſian kingdom, after failing in ſome attempts, however formidable, to ſubdue Greece, ſoon exhibited evident appearances of decline, till the crown was wreſted from the brow of Darius by the vićtory of Alexander; that the broken portions of Alexander's extenſive domi- 1 42 On the Facts of Revelation. dominions had fallen a prey to the Roman legions; and that Rome was become that vaſt fourth kingdom, and ſtood, as ſuch, at the head of the conquered world: could any man, with this prophecy, and the predićtions of ſo much inter- mediate circumſtance, before him, know all or almoſt any of theſe ſucceſſive events; and yet poſſeſs no evidence, that the preſcience of God had been concerned in firſt delivering and after- wards ſo amplifying the predićtion, and that his power was viſibly in progreſſive operation to fulfil it No;-event after event, advancing in a predićted train, would hold up to public noto- riety a growing teſtimony, that the prophecy from firſt to laſt carried the ſeal of divinity upon it. - - What might juſtly be expected, actually en- ſued. When it was proclaimed, “that the king- “dom of heaven was at hand,” “all the people “were in expectation, and all men muſed in “ their hearts of John, whether he were the “Chriſt or not:” and “Art thou that Prophet?” was the queſtion of the public to him. “I know “ that Meſfias cometh,” ſaid the Samaritan,wo- man, concurring beyond doubt with the received opinion of her people. And when Jeſus had publicly appeared, “Art thou he that ſhould “ come º’’ ‘‘Is not this the Chriſt º’’ and “Do “ the rulers know indeed that this is the very “Chriſt?” were queſtions to which his “gracious “words” and mighty works gave occaſion. All imply On the Fa&s of Revelation. 143 imply it to have been a point of notoriety, that God had declared his purpoſe of ſending to Iſrael a great prophet, and that the time for expecting him was underſtood to be now arrived. “We “ have found him of whom Moſes in the law, “ and the prophets, did write,” are words which very expreſſively ſhew the public conſtruction of the prophecies here concerned. Thus, that thoſe prophecies of Revelation which the record contains exhibited real mira– cles of Divine foreknowledge, and that thoſe Faćts of Revelation which it details diſplayed real miracles of Divine power, appear to have been two points equally notorious, and equally acknowledged among ſucceſſive generations of men. In no age had God left his own gracious intentions “without witneſs.” From the very early aera, at which the completion of his pro- miſe to one nation was proceeding, he had been occaſionally imparting written revelations, which were ſo far underſtood as to render it a ſtanding point of notoriety, that he was ſtill conducting events, in a courſe which he had notified, to that “fulneſs of time,” and that fit ſtate of things, in which the great future Prophet would bring his univerſal bleſfing to mankind. SECTION 144 On the Fa&s of Revelation. SECTION IV. Another Prophecy of Moſes—preſent motoriety of Divine interpoſition thence reſulting—Conclu- Jºon. WE may conclude our view with another pro- phecy of Moſes. “Thou,” ſaid Moſes to Iſrael, “ ſhalt be re- “ moved into all the kingdoms of the earth”— “ the Lord ſhall ſcatter thee among all people “from one end of the earth unto the other”— “ the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, “even great plagues, and of long continuance” —“ thou ſhalt be an aſtoniſhment”—“ and a “ proverb and a by-word among all nations.”— “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 ut- “ terly”—“ when thou art in tribulation”— “ even IN THE LATTER DAYS 9, if thou turn to the “Lord thy God”—“ he will not forſake thee, “ nor deſtroy thee.” The Moſaical language di- rectly refers to one great event already in com- pletion, and very expreſſively ſuggeſts another, which is yet reſerved for future accompliſhment. * This Scriptural expreſfion denotes generally, Kimchi ſays inva- riably, the age of the Meſfiah. It is uſed by Hoſea iii. 5. in repeat- ing this very prophecy. See alſo Iſaiah ii. 2. This On the Fa&s of Revelation. 14.5 This prophecy was repeated as to both its views by ſubſequent prophets, and particularly by Hoſea. It was further ſanctioned by the words of Jeſus Chriſt: “ They”—“ſhall be led “ away captive into all nations”—“Ye ſhall not “fee me henceforth, till ye ſhall ſay, Bleſſed is “ he that cometh in the name of the Lord ;” that is, till ye ſhall ſay, Bleſſed in the name of the Lord is 6 spx?usyos. Be it here deeply conſidered, over how vaſt an amount of facts this ſignal prophecy extended its reach. It undertook that, after a period of many thouſand years, events abſolutely incalculable as to number ſhould all nevertheleſs work in com— bination to one great end; to that of excepting the ſingle nation of Iſrael from coming, though under a total ruin of its religious and civil ſtate, to that “full end,” which under ſuch circum- ſtances would be made of the reſt of the nations; and to that of producing, and drawing out into “long continuance,” its diſtreſsful diſperſion, and yet diſtinct preſervation, in every quarter of the globe, till thoſe final mercies, for which we be- lieve it reſerved, ſhall in its happy hour arrive. That in all the points of this caſe, in thoſe that move our pity, and in thoſe that animate our hope, the preſent fact ſtands in exact adjuſt- ment with the prophecy, our own ſenſes, and even the world itſelf, muſt witneſs. Here, then, the appeal comes home to the public of this very day. In their notoriety it muſt ſtand, that God L In OW" 146 On the Fačis of Revelation. now interpoſes by infinite power to fulfil, what he did of old interpoſe by infinite foreknowledge to reveal. To ſuppoſe that other parties, and not God's commiſſioned and inſpired prophets, delivered and repeated a predićtion ſo capital and exten- five, and yet that God employed his power dur- ing eighteen centuries in fulfilling it, and in thus accrediting thoſe to whom he had not given au- thority, ſeems entirely abſurd. And if Divine Power did not act in this caſe under confede- racy with impoſtors, it muſt follow, that both the prophecy and the accompliſhment came from God. CONCLUSION. OF what has been flated in the courſe of this fecond part, this is the ſubſtance. The Facts of Revelation, when alleged' to a multitude of eyewitneſſes, expreſsly as events which they had known to be miraculous, were by them unreſervedly admitted to have been, what they were called, wonders and ſigns which the Lord did : they were, moreover, in many in- ſtances, nationally certified, as notoriouſly mira- culous, by public memorials: they were alſo further atteſted, as acknowledged miracles, by written On the Faëts of Revelation. 147 written records of the time; records, which not only bore witneſs to miracles, as ſuch, when they enſued, but alſo were and are known to have repeatedly predićted other great wonders of Almighty Power, which God diſplayed in ſub- ſequent ages, and is now diſplaying in our own. Surely, then, ſuch a courſe of miraculous facts, and ſuch a ſucceſſion of promiſes and prophecies of future miracles, and even of one mighty work which we ourſelves behold to be now, as it were, holding Iſrael in a prepared ſtate for ano- ther miracle predicted too, ought in reaſon to convince every man, that Revelation, in all its parts, had for its ſource the mind of God, and has for its witneſs the paſt and preſent opera- tion of his power. “Who hath wrought and “ done it, calling the generations from the be- “ginning I the Lord, the firſt, and with the “laſt; I am he.” ON THE ANGELICAL MESSAGE TO THE VIRGIN MARY. O N T H E ANGELICAL MESSAGE TO THE VIRGIN MARY. SECTION I. The Angel's divine miſſion how made evident to the Virgin—charaćter of Everlaſting King ex- cluſively appropriated—prophetical views of it —its accompliſhment in Jeſus. & 4 WHEN the time of the promiſe drew nigh,” it was notified to a Virgin among the daughters of David, that Jeſus the promiſed Saviour ſhould be conceived in her womb by the immediate agency of God, and be “made fleſh.” The proper evidence of the divine miſſion of that angel, by whom this notice was conveyed, was to her ſufficiently obvious. It was prophecy with an accompliſhment, not remote, but im- pending, and atteſted ſpeedily by feelings of her own. This, however, was only part of the evi- dence then vouchſafed to her. L 4 The 152 On the Angelical Meſſage The divine meſſenger had mentioned the caſe of Elizabeth. To her accordingly Mary went “ with haſte,” and found her in a ſtate that veri- fied the angelical repreſentation. This circum- ſtance, of itſelf, extraordinary as it was in reſpect of Elizabeth, might have been convincing ; it was however attended with another incompara- bly ſignal. Elizabeth on her part alſo imme- diately ſhewed an inſight into the divine purpoſe, and knew, not only the actual conception of Mary, but alſo ſo much of its cauſe and its ob- ject, as to hail her the mother of her Lord. It appeared that a divine revelation was vouchſafed to Elizabeth, as it had been to the Virgin her- ſelf. - . Theſe circumſtances carried ſuch evidence of a divine interpoſition, that the hymn of praiſe, which Mary forthwith uttered, was not more rapturous in point of devotion, than it was rea- ſonable in point of faith. Such were the proofs in which ſhe then juſtly acquieſced ; to us they come with a great acceſ- ſion of ſtrength, from the ſubſequent accompliſh- ment of all thoſe characters, which the Angel then prophetically aſcribed to “that Holy Thing,” which was to be born of her. Of thoſe characters the Angel and preceding prophets had indeed made the ſame diſplay, but without defect of evidence that the Angel, ſingly confidered, was an original prophet. It may be aſcertained in whom, as the great object, the repre- to the Virgin Mary. 15.3 repreſentations of the Angel and the prophets coincided, and in what conſtruction may be de- termined from the ſenſe in which that great ob- jećt, whom the Angel pointed out, afterwards aſſumed, and thereby accompliſhed the charac- ters, which they had reſpectively attributed to him. But without pretending to ſo full a conſidera- tion of the Angelical meſſage, as would com- pletely anſwer this purpoſe, I attempt barely to ſhew, that it may not be difficult to obtain con- ſiderable views of the light in which the Scrip- tures really place the character and perſon of the promiſed Redeemer. What the Scriptural repreſentation, in both theſe reſpects, may be, is a queſtion of fact ; and as that entirely depends upon the authority of the Scriptures themſelves, there ſeems more piety and more prudence in enquiring what they teach, than what different centuries and different men have profeſſed to teach from them. It may, then, be introdućtory to the further reſearches of thoſe who will enquire for them- ſelves into the Scriptural repreſentation of the Redeemer, with a reſolution of adjuſting their faith to it, as far as they can aſcertain it, to con- ſider the characters aſcribed to him in the An- gelical meſſage to the Virgin, as it ſtands in the Goſpel of St. Luke. ()ne 154 On the Angelical Meffage One character of “ that Holy Thing,” which was to be born of Mary, is thus aſſigned; “The “Lord God ſhall give unto him the throne of “ his father David, and he ſhal; reign over the “ houſe of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom “ there ſhall be no end.” Preceding prophecies had uniformly preſented ſome great perſon under a kingly character in a ſtriking point of view. After the divine promiſes had been limited to the line of Jacob, Iſaac prophetically ſpeaks of Jacob's ſeed, that people ſhould “ ſerve him,” and “ nations bow down to him,” and that he ſhould be Lord over his brethren. The ſame regal eminence was recognized by Jacob in the bleſſing he delivered to Judah, and “ the gathering of the people” was characteriſti- cally attributed to Shiloh, that ſhould come. It was the prophetical language of Balaam ; “Out of Jacob ſhall come He that ſhall have do- “minion;” and he characterized him perſonally as “a ſceptre.” To Nathan were revealed in viſion the words of God reſpecting David ; “I will raiſe up thy “ſeed after thee, which ſhall be of thy ſons, and “I will eſtabliſh his kingdom—I will ſettle him “in my houſe, and in my kingdom for ever, and “ his throne ſhall be eſtabliſhed for evermore.” David alſo commonly refers to that predićtion of Nathan, and prophetically aſſerts the divine promiſe it contained ; “I have found David my “ ſervant, º to the Wirgin Mary. I 55 “ ſervant, with my holy oil have I anointed “ him—his ſeed ſhall endure for ever, and his “ throne as the ſun before me ; it ſhall be eſta- “bliſhed for ever as the moon, and as a faithful “witneſs in heaven.” And in the Pſalms, that predicted Seed is very frequently characterized by the attribute of everlaſting and univerſal do- minion, and diſtinguiſhed by the name of Da- vid. “Of the increaſe of his government and “ peace,” ſays Iſaiah, “there ſhall be no end, “upon the throne of David, and upon his king- “dom.” He ſtiles him “a rod out of the ſtem “ of Jeſſe,” and “a root of Jeſſe,” that ſhould “ſtand for an enſign,” and be given for “a “ leader and commander unto the people,” and more than once appropriates to him the name of David. Jeremiah, having ſtiled him “a righteous “ branch raiſed unto David,” adds, that “as a “ king he ſhall reign and proſper,” and elſewhere expreſsly names him David. By Ezekiel the ſame divine promiſe was pro- phetically repeated ; “I will ſet up one ſhep- “ herd over them, and he ſhall feed them, even “my ſervant David; and I the Lord will be “ their God, and my ſervant David a prince “ among them; I the Lord have ſpoken it:” and in another place, “My ſervant David ſhall be “ their prince for ever.” Daniel, who held the prophetical office under the 1.56 On the Angelical Meſſage the Babyloniſh captivity, beheld One in viſion inveſted with a dominion over “all people, na- “tions, and languages,” and with a kingdom not to paſs away or be deſtroyca. Zechariah, after the return of Iſrael from cap- tivity in Babylon, prophetically exclaims to the daughter of Jeruſalem, “Behold, thy King com- “ eth unto thce;” and ſpeaks of him elſewhere; “He ſhall build the temple of the Lord, and he “ſhall bear the glory, and ſhall ſit and rule upon “ his throne.” Thus, before and under the captivity, and after it, that is, from an early period of prophecy to the lateſt, the ſame view, under occaſional ac- ceſſions of light, was preſented of an univerſal and everlaſting king in the family of David. And as the conſtituent circumſtances of that regal character, which preceding prophets had gra- dually diſcloſed, are by the Angel accumulated, it ſeems that the prophetical and angelical reve- lations are parallel, and coincide in the ſame preeminent perſon. For ſince the idea of two everlaſting and univerſal kingdoms implies a con- tradiction, it can ſcarcely be conceived, that more than one was intended. But if this point was actually diſputed, there are prophetical teſtimo- nies ſufficient to aſcertain it. “David my ſer- “vant ſhall be king over them, and they all ſhall “ have one ſhepherd,” ſays Jeremiah : and Eze- kiel to the ſame effect; “One king ſhall be king “ to them all ; they ſhall be no more two king- “ doms to the Pirgin Mary. 157 “ doms any more at all, and my ſervant David “ſhall be their prince for ever;” and Zechariah ſtill more fully; “The Lord ſhall be king over all “ the earth; in that day ſhall there be one Lord, “ and his name one.” It ſeems, then, that it is this great prophetical character, which the Angel attributed perſonally to Jeſus, the future Son of the Virgin. And of the completion of it in him ſufficient evidence has been continually accruing from the time of his manifeſtation in the fleſh to this day. Al- though a king, before his Paſſion, in deſigna- tion rather than in poſſeſſion, yet even then he manifeſted a power of his own, by giving laws to his Church ſupported with a ſanction of re- wards and puniſhments; by commanding all natural and ſpiritual beings, and even him that had the power of death. But after his reſurrec- tion, he claimed actual poſſeſſion of that king- dom, which the prophets and the Angel after them aſcribed to him; “All power is given unto “ me in heaven and earth.” He aſſured the Twelve of his preſence with them by that au- thority and power, which now were his, “even “ to the end of the world;” and exemplified that regal authority, by ſending from heaven the promiſe of the Father upon them, and by uſing ſuch language, on appearing in viſion to St. John, as implied the preſent exerciſe of that kingly power; “He that overcometh, and keepeth my “works unto the end, to him will I give power ‘‘ Over | 58 On the Angelical Meſſage “over the nations, and he ſhall rule them with a “ rod of iron; as the veſſels of a potter ſhall they “ be broken to ſhivers, even as I received of my “Father;” and by aſſerting that he held “ the “keys of hell and of death,” and “ the key of “David.” And after the delivery of that pro- miſe he has been ſeen “coming in his king- “dom,” to overthrow the temple and polity of Iſrael, and to advance his Goſpel above and in place of the Moſaical law, although avowedly a diſpenſation of divine authority. And his regal dominion continues ſtill in a courſe of operation, in ſome of its parts plain and aſſignable. From this accompliſhment of that regal cha- raćter in the Son of the Virgin, which the pro- phets had diſplayed, and the Angel perſonally at- tributed to him, it ſeems to be aſcertained, that they ſeverally ſpoke from divine revelation vouch- ſafed immediately to themſelves. To this attribute of everlaſting dominion it will be of uſe to recur occaſionally; for as it ex- cluſively belongs to one great obječt, and was claimed by Jeſus, and has continued from his appearance on earth to the preſent time demon- ſtrably verified in him, it will require and autho- rize the application of other characters to him, which the Scriptures may occaſionally place in conjunction with it. SECTION to the Pirgin Mary. 1 5 9 S E C T I O N II. The charaćler, that he ſhould be born of a Vir- gin—prophetical views of that charaćter, in- cluding with it that of Everlaſting King—ac- compliſhment of it in Jeſus—inferences as to the evidence of the divine miſſion of the Angel. IN the prophetical meſſage of the Angel it is another character of the Everlaſting King, that he ſhould be born of the Virgin Mary. Here, two characteriſtical circumſtances are implied, that he ſhould be born as a man, and of a Vir- gin. I. Of theſe, the firſt is very intelligibly pre- dićted. The original promiſe of God, in the very tenor of it, ſpecified the Seed of the Wo- man, and appropriated to him perſonally a fu- ture vićtory over the enemy of God and man- kind. “ Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is “given,” ſays the Evangelical prophet, and ſub- joins the regal character, “ and the government “ſhall be upon his ſhoulder” without end. Of his forty-ninth chapter ſome verſes are ap- plied to Chriſt in the New Teſtament Scriptures. The chapter opens thus ; “Liſten, O iſles, and “hearken, ye people, from far; the Lord hath “called me from the womb, from the bowels of & 6 my 160 On the Angelical Meſſage “my mother hath he made mention of my “ name;”—and again, “Now faith the Lord, “ that called me from the womb to be his ſer- “vant.” He, whom kings and potentates were to worſhip, and the duſt of whoſe feet they were to lick up, namely the future univerſal King, here repreſents himſelf as called and formed from the womb of his mother, and dwells with a ſtriking ſignificance on that particular circum- ſtance of his character. His birth, and the place of it, are predićted by Micah ; “Thou, Bethlehem-Ephratah—out of “ thee ſhall he come forth unto me, that is to be “ Ruler in Iſrael.” The word, here rendered “ſhall come forth,” commonly occurs in the ſenſe of natal egreſſion, and before the time of Chriſt it was in this paſſage ſo underſtood by the Jews. II. To the ſecond characteriſtical circumſtance, that he ſhould be born of a Virgin, there are alſo ſome prophetical references. To the houſe of David, when in fear of pre- ſent extirpation by confederated enemies, Iſaiah delivered a prophecy with remote accompliſh- ment, and of courſe with an intelligible intima- tion of that very deliverance, which was then deſired; “The Lord himſelf ſhall give you a “ſign; behold, a Virgin ſhall conceive and bear “ a Son.” - To the ſame ſingular circumſtance Jeremiah has alſo prophetically alluded ; “The Lord hath created to the Pirgin Mary. 161 “ created a new thing in the earth, a woman ſhall “ compaſs a man.” Theſe are ſome of the intelligible notices which God had given of his purpoſe reſpecting the incarnation of the Everlaſting King; and correſpondent with them is that repreſentation which “that Holy Thing” which was born of Mary afterwards made of himſelf. In his min- iſtry he uſually aſſumed the title, Son of Man, not without an apparent deſign of diſtinguiſhing himſelf as that peculiar Seed, which had been originally promiſed to the firſt parents of man- kind, as well as that Son of Man, whom the Tord would inveſt with glory and a kingdom, according to the ſignal prophecy of Daniel. And that filial and parental relation *, which at the hour of his ſuffering he endeavoured to eſtabliſh virtually between Mary and his be- loved diſciple, was that which he had always, and then particularly, recognized as having ſub- ſiſted really between himſelf and her. Since, then, the prophets had thus aſcribed a birth as man, and from a Virgin-mother, to the Everlaſting King, the point which places the Angelical meſſenger ſingly in the light of an original prophet, was the particular deſignation he made of the perſonal objects, when the pro- * So evident had been his livelong acknowledgment of the Virgin for his real and proper parent, that, upon his aſſuming the charaćier of Chriſt, it became the queſtion of the public, “Is not this the ſon * of Mary 2" &c, * M1 phets 162 On the Angelical Meſſage phets had ſtated only the characteriſtical at- tributes. That the Virgin-mother ſhould be Mary, and that the Everlaſting King ſhould be her ſon, was a new and excluſive appropriation, which, as it was verified by a train of events to the production of which the almighty power of God only was equal, implies that a ſpecial com- munication of the divine will had been purpoſely vouchſafed to the Angel, and alſo that the cha- racters of the Redeemer, and their genuine im- port, had been repreſented by the prophets, with the ſame adjuſtment to the mind of God, as their obječt was ſpecified by the Angel. SECTION III. The charaćier, Son of God—prophetical conſtruc- tion of that title ſhewn from ſeveral inſtances —application of the divine names—accompliſh- ment of the Angelical and Prophetical repre- ſentations, when Jeſus aſſumed that title—in what ſenſe he aſſumed it. IN the Angelical meſſage it is another charac- ter of the Everlaſting King, that was to be born of Mary, that he ſhould be called the “Son of “God,” in conſequence of his having God for his father, as really as he had the Virgin for his' mother. Of to the Wirgin Mary. 163 Of this charaćter alſo, as of thoſe preceding, there are direct notices in the previous language of God by his Prophets; “I will make him my “firſtborn;” and in another place, “I will be to “ him a Father, and he ſhall be to me a Son;” and again, “Thou art my Son, this day have I “begotten thee.” As theſe characters reſpec- tively ſtand aſſociated with the peculiar attribute of everlaſting dominion, the prophetical and An- gelical repreſentations are thereby ſhewn to be coincident in the Son of Mary; and if ſo, the prophets and the Angel muſt be underſtood to apply to him the title, Son of God, in the very ſenſe wherein he aſſumed it, and thereby ful- filled their repreſentations. Here, then, the proper enquiry relates, firſt, to the prophetical conſtruction of that title; and, ſecondly, to the ſenſe, in which Jeſus actually applied it to himſelf. - I. The import of the title, Son of God, accord- ing to prophetical repreſentation, is excluſively tranſcendent. “ Unto the Son he ſaith, Thy throne, O Godb, “ is for ever and ever.” By the attribute of everlaſting dominion it appears that the ſacred * Compare Pſalm xlv. 7. “God, even thy God,” &c. In the margin, “O God, even thy God,” &c. So alſo Cocceius and Suren- huſius tranſlate it, “O Deus, Deus tuus;” and the laſt of them ren- ders the Greek expreſſion of the Apoſtle, eiºs, vocatively alſo. Kar- a??&y. 598. M 2 writer 164 On the Angelical Meſſage writer to the Hebrews has juſtly applied this paſſage to the Son of God. - “A Virgin,” ſays Iſaiah, “ſhall bear a Son, “ and ſhall call his name Emmanuel,” which St. Matthew interprets, “God with us;” and by the ſame prophet in another place, the Child born, and the Son given unto us, is ſtiled “ the “Mighty God.” By the diſtinguiſhing attri- bute of everlaſting dominion, which is ſubjoined in the laſt of the two paſſages, it is aſcertained that the Son of God, begotten of the Virgin, is the object of the prophecy. And as one of the proper names of God “ is therein aſcribed to the Son of God in as ſingular and abſolute a ſenſe as to the Father himſelf, there ſeems the beſt rea- ſon to believe that the Son is in fact, what he is repreſented in name, God, as the Father is. Re- lative applications of that divine name which is here uſed, as in the paſſage, “I have made thee “a God unto Pharaoh 4,” have been frequently ſhewn to authorize no oppoſite conſtruction. ‘If the relation, which the words, “to Pharaoh,” c El, in the fingular, is not to be confounded with the plural form. In the laſt it is often an appellative, in the firſt it ſtands as the proper and peculiar name of God. And from a variety of Scrip- tural places it has been ſhewn that El, uſed as the name of God, de- notes not merely the divine power, but the divine nature. Calov. Script. Anti-Socin, lib. p. 147. “Hilar, lib. vii. de Trin. Non dicitur Deus genuiſſe Moſem Deum, ſed conſtituiſſe. plainly to the Wirgin Mary. 1.65 plainly imply, ſhould be taken away, ſtill it can- not be ſaid that Moſes is there abſolutely called God. If he is not, but the Son is, abſolutely ſo called, it appears that this name of God is not applied to Moſes in that real and perſonal ſenſe, wherein it is aſcribed to the Son. Nor will ap- plications of this divine name in the plural form, as in the paſſage, “Ye are Gods,” and in any of the ſame caſt, juſtify a contrary opinion. Between applications of it in ſuch a ſenſe as avowedly ad- mits many, and thoſe which imply excluſion of more than one, there ſeems to be no analogy. In the firſt caſe it is virtually aſſerted, that the ſeveral parties are not really what they are called, and the context, upon inſpection, will over-rule any idea that they are ; but in the laſt caſe it is far from evident that the fingle party is called that which he is not, and in the context ſuch a con- cluſion has no ſupport. And as the prophets aſcribe to the Everlaſting King, that is, to the Son of God begotten of the Virgin, one of the proper names of God, in an abſolute and unparalleled ſenſe, ſo alſo they attri- bute another as unreſervedly to him. Iſaiah ſpake of Chriſt and of his glory, accord- ing to the teſtimony of St. John, in the viſion he deſcribes of the “Lord ſitting upon his throne,” namely, of “the King, the Lord of hoſts.” The Ruler of the houſe of Jacob for ever is here, as often in the Pſalms, ſtiled abſolutely “ the “King.” The diſtinguiſhing attribute, then, but M 3 much 166 On the Angelical Meſſage much more the expreſs authority of an Evange- liſt, appropriates thoſe charaćters, “ the Lord,” “ the Lord of hoſts,” to “that Holy Thing” which had a birth from the Virgin, and had God for his Father. “Behold,” ſays the ſame prophet, “ the Lord “God will come with a ſtrong hand, and his “ arm ſhall rule for him ; behold, his reward is “ with him, and his work before him: he ſhall “feed his flock like a ſhepherd.” By the attri- bute of Regal or Paſtoral rule, which is diſtin- guiſhing in the Son of God born of the Virgin, it appears that the prophet ſtiles him “the Lord “Jehovah.” º “Behold the days come, ſaith the Lord,” by his prophet Jeremiah, “that I will raiſe unto “David a righteous branch; and a King ſhall “reign and proſper; and this is his name whereby “he ſhall be called, The Lord our righteouſneſs.” In this, as in previous inſtances, it ſeems evident from the regal diſtinétion in this deſcendant of David, that the repreſentation of the prophet has the ſame object with that of the Angel, namely, the Son of God, born of Mary. In the paſſages immediately preceding, the great king, that is, the Son of God born of the Virgin Mary, is called Jehovah, which the early Jews admitted to be the proper name of the Medias. This ſeems without example in Scrip- ture. Sometimes the title, Jehovah, ſtands ap- pellatively as part of the name given to things, but- to the Pirgin Mary. 167 but by human impoſition of it merely, even when the thing was unqueſtionably known not to be Jehovah. But ſuch inſtances are not pa- rallel; for the ſtrength of the caſe lies in this, that a perſon, namely, the Everlaſting King, bears properly, and not appellatively, the name of Jehovah, and that not aſcribed to him by man, but by the Spirit of God ſpeaking by his pro- phets. Judging, then, according to the dif- ference of the caſes, we can hardly venture to ſay that the Son of God is no more Jehovah, than the thing is; but, on the contrary, may rea- ſonably believe that the Son of God is perſonally and properly what the Spirit of God has called him. That the name of Jehovah" is any where at- tributed to a created Angel, as repreſenting Je- hovah, is not aſcertained. But if a clear inſtance of ſuch an application had been aſſigned, ſtill that application would be relative and not abſo- lute. On diſcharging the relation implied in the notion of repreſenting God, it could not be, nor is it any where, ſaid of the Angel ſingly, that he is Jehovah. If not, the name of Jehovah being given to the Son, when he is conſidered perſonally and ſingly, then the attribute of that • In Scripture the names of God are given to one angel, and not to many; and one angel ſo ačts and ſpeaks as if he was God, and not many. And this peculiar circumſtance ſeems to imply, that this One is perſonally what he is called, and what his aétion and words ſhew him to be. See Calov. Scrip. Anti-Socin, vol. i. pag. 129. M 4 Ila IIlê 168 On the Angelical Meſſage name implies him to be really what he is called, and not to be called relatively what he is not. This has been frequently ſhewn f from paſſages of Iſaiah's prophecy and from other places of Scripture. - r - Of him, who was to be ruler in Iſrael, and to be born at Bethlehem, Micah ſubjoins this charac- ter; “Whoſe goings forth were from old, from “everlaſting.” In the time of Chriſt, this paſ- ſage was admitted by the Jews to reſpect the Meſſiah, and from the regal character, which occurs in the paſſage, it appears that the ſame obječt, namely, “the Son of God to be born of “Mary, is here characterized by a nativity from “everlaſting *.” If there was not one ſenſe, in which his filial relation to God, as his Father, had ſubſiſted “from everlaſting,” and alſo one ſenſe, in which it commenced upon his incarna- f Whoever would here recur to the objećtions made by Crellius, muſt make them good againſt the anſwers of Calovius, Bp. Pearſon, and many others. For myſelf, I ſpeak according to what I ſee, or think I ſee, of the ſuperiority of evidence. # In the paſſage of Micah, the expreſſions “goings forth,” and that immediately preceding, “ ſhall come forth,” are verſions of the ſame word in different forms. It occurs in many places of Scripture in the ſenſe of natal egreſſion, Gen. x. I4. 2 Kings xx. 18. Job i. 21. Iſaiah xi. 1. See Pol. Syn. “From of old, from everlaſting.” Arab. Verſ. “ a diebus aeternis.” Syr. “a principio, a diebus aeternis.” Jonath. Chal. Paraph. “ab aeternitate.” See Iſai. xl. 28. xliii. 13. and Dr. Pocock's note on Mic. v. 2. St. Paul ſtiles Chriſt IIgotározo; wd.cn; ºticews: which paſſage may be rendered, as Dr. Clarke admits, “born before all creation.” So Septuag. 2 Sam. xix. 43. IIporározo; #yd h at ; tion to the Wirgin Mary. 160 tion in the Virgin's womb, then the prophet and the Angel will ſeem to have incurred a mu- tual contradićtion, which in perſons both of them ſpeaking by divine authority is inconceiva- ble. It ſeems, then, that, according to prophetical repreſentations, the title, Son of God, did not im- port only that filial relation to the Father, which would commence at the future fulneſs of time, when the Everlaſting King ſhould be begotten of the Virgin, but alſo, and much more, that which had ſubſiſted from eternity, and implied his perſonal deity. - II. The ſenſe, alſo, in which Chriſt aſſumed the title, Son of God, was adjuſted to the pro- phetical repreſentations, and correſponded with the light in which they place it. He called himſelf “the only begotten Son of “God.” This character excludes every gradation of that vio9 saia, which St. Paul ſpeaks of, by which God is ſaid to have “many ſons,” and aſſerts a filial relation to God by a real and natural gene- ration, and not by mere adoption. To the queſtion, “Art thou then the Son of “God?” he replied by an affertion that God was his Father, Tarápa ſºloy, and upon this the High- Prieſt and people imputed blaſphemy to him. The ſenſe, then, in which he ſtiled himſelf Son of God, evidently was underſtood by them to be a real and tranſcendent ſenſe. Accordingly, the Jews ſaid, “By our law he ought to die, “ becauſe 1 70 On the Angelical Meſſage “ becauſe he made himſelf the Son of God;” and “ they ſought to kill him becauſe he ſaid that “God was his Father, making himſelf equal “ with God.” And upon his afferting, “I an “my Father are one,” they took up ſtones to caſt at him. Of this proceeding they ex- plain the reaſon ; “ For a good work we ſtone “ thee not, but for blaſphemy, and becauſe thou, “being a man, makeſt thyſelf God.” From the whole of this intereſting expoſtulation it appears evident that Jeſus, by aſſuming the title, Son of God, intentionally claimed a Sonſhip to the Fa- ther, not official, but natural, and implying equality with the Father, and perſonal Deity. That conſtruction, which they avowedly made, he did not decline, but defended h. And even if the remark be true, that Son of God is but another title for Meſſiah i, and that both theſe are interchangeably put the one for the other, * It ſeems inconceivable that any one, who had conſidered this converſation, ſhould venture to ſay that Chriſt never pretended to be more than a man, like men. i Socinus advanced this opinion, and Grotius, Hobbes, and Mr. Locke, with others, have defended it. But it ſeems that they con- found a natural and an official title, which the Jews diſtinguiſhed, ſee John v. 18. x. 3o. 33. Chriſt at the time juſtifying their con- ſtrućtion of the title, Son of God, in the natural ſenſe. St, Paul, Galat. iv. 8. ſays, “When they knew not God, they did ſervice “to them which by nature are no gods.” If St. Paul did not be- lieve that Chriſt, to whom in many parts of his writings he pays di- vine honours, was God by nature, he in his Chriſtian ſtate incurs that very idolatry which he objećts to his converts in their heathen ſtate. ſtill to the Virgin Mary. 171 ſtill the previous queſtion remains as to the 'rea- ſon of his being called Son of God. It ſeems that the anſwer, if adjuſted to the Scriptures, muſt be, that he really was what he is called, and was not officially called what naturally he was not. Accordingly, he admitted the unre- ſerved addreſs of his Apoſtle Thomas, “My Lord, “ and my God,” and gave a ſanction to the ſame faith in all future Chriſtians by the promiſe of a bleſfing. SECTION IV. Charaćfer of a Saviour implied in the name Jeſus —prophetical applications of that character to the Everlaſting King—accompliſhment of it in Jeſus—general amount of preceding obſerva- tions—inſtances to ſupport it. * THE name of Jeſus, which the Angel appro- priated to the Son of God and of the Virgin Mary, implies alſo, according to the conſtruc- tion of St. Matthew, the character of a Saviour. Agreeably to the particular application here made, that eminent perſon, whom foregoing prophets commonly repreſented as given for ſalvation, and ſent to make reconciliation, to “ſprinkle the nations,” and to “juſtify many," they at the ſame time and in the ſame places characterized I 72 On the Angelical Meſſage chara&terized no leſs commonly as the Everlaſt- ing King. Of this it will be ſufficient to give the following examples. The promiſe of God to his people is thus de- livered by Iſaiah ; “I will make an everlaſting “covenant with you, even the ſure mercies of “David; behold, I have given him for a witneſs “ to the people, a leader and commander to the “ people.” The covenant to be eſtabliſhed by the myſtical David, that is, by the Everlaſting King, is here repreſented as a diſpenſation of ſure mercies that were his. “To finiſh tranſgreſſion, and to make an end “ of ſins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, “ and to bring in everlaſting righteouſneſs, and “to ſeal up the viſion and the prophecy,” are purpoſes which the prophet Daniel repreſents as depending upon Meſſiah the Prince. Of that exultation and ſhout, which Zecha- riah would excite in the daughter of Jeruſalem, he thus aſſigns the reaſon; “Behold, thy King “ cometh unto thee; he is juſt, and having ſalva- “tion:” and again; “He ſhall ſpeak peace unto “ the heathen, and his dominion ſhall be from “ ſea even to ſea, and from the river even to the “ends of the earth.” The repreſentations of the Angel and the pro- phets ſeem, then, in this inſtance, as in others, coincident; and according to them, the Son of the Virgin, as he was the Everlaſting King, was alſo the univerſal Saviour, and all “ the pro- “miſes to the Pirgin Mary. 173 “ miſes of God in him were Yea, and in him “ Amen.” That Jeſus, by his miniſtry, ſufferings, and death, had fulfilled this character of univerſal Saviour, which the Angel had by that very name virtually appropriated to him, he gave, when riſen again, ſufficient evidence to thoſe perſons, whom he had choſen expreſsly for the purpoſe of at- teſting that accompliſhment to the world; “Thus “ it is written, and thus it behoved Chriſt to ſuf- “fer, and to riſe from the dead the third day: “ and that repentance and remiſſion of ſins “ſhould be preached in his name among all na- “tions, beginning at Jeruſalem: and ye are wit– “neſſes of theſe things.” And further, that by him the divine promiſes of univerſal ſalvation have been accompliſhed, is in ſome degree de- monſtrable from the preſent exerciſe of his regal authority, in ſupport of his Goſpel that contains the terms of it; but in a greater degree, from thoſe ſigns and mighty works, with which he enabled his appointed witneſſes to authenticate the teſtimony they gave, that God had highly ex- alted him “ with his right-hand to be a Prince “ and a Saviour.” There ſeems, then, to be no defect of evi- dence that, as the prophets by the Spirit of Chriſt which was in them, according to St. Peter, “ teſtified before hand the ſufferings of “Chriſt, and the glory that ſhould follow,” the Angel alſo, by the ſame divine Spirit, propheti- cally 1 74 On the Angelical Meſſage cally ſpecified the ſon of the Virgin Mary as the true object of their prophecies, as the Saviour whom they had foretold. Of all the preceding obſervations this appears to be the general amount. One, and only one, Everlaſting King was predićted, and, as Son of God, repreſented as God, and, as ſon of the Virgin, repreſented as man, with this addition, that he was the univerſal Saviour. With this prophetical repreſentation the terms of the An- gelical meſſage to Mary coincide; and as the Angel has appeared, by the completion of each particular chara&ter which he inſtanced, and by that very object whom he named, to have ſpoken by the authority of God, who alone can declare the end from the beginning, and, by appointing every intermediate proceſs and inſtrument of his work, eventually adjuſt the one to the other, the conſequence ſeems to be, that Jeſus was, of his mother, really man, and, of his Father, really God, thus manifeſted in the fleſh to accompliſh the promiſed redemption of the world. To ſupport this concluſion, in all its parts, it may be added, that the divinity and humanity of his perſon, with a reference to his paſſion, are in- cluded in expreſſions uſed either by the prophets, or by himſelf, or by his Apoſtles. The follow- ing inſtances only will be produced. In the thirteenth chapter of Zechariah's pro- phecy there is the following paſſage; “ Awake, “O ſword, againſt my Shepherd, and againſt “ the to the Pirgin Mary. 1 75 “ the man that is my fellow k, faith the Lord of “ hoſts; ſmite the Shepherd, and the ſheep ſhall “be ſcattered, and I will turn my hand upon “ the little ones.” Of this verſe part is referred by Chriſt himſelf to his own paſſion, and to the deſertion of his Apoſtles; and by an application of ſuch authority it is aſcertained that under the character of “Shepherd” the prophet ſpecifies the Son of God. The Lord of hoſts, then, ſtiles him “the man that is my fellow.” This he could not be, if man only, for in the human nature he was made avowedly “a little lower “ than the Angels;” nor was he ſo, as an An- * Vulgat. “virum cohaerentem mihi.” Chald. et Pagnin. “ſocium.” Vatabl. “coaequalem mihi.” The original word bears two ſignifica- tions : I. one near, or joined in neighbourhood to another; 2. near, next to, beſide, anſwerable, correſponding to. Taylor's Hebrew Concord. v. 1382. Junius renders it, “virum proximum, qui ſtate regione al- “terius,” and confiders it as applied by the Father to Chriſt, as alter idem, “the expreſs image of his perſon,” as Heb. i. 3. Cocceius, cited by Calovius, obſerves that it ſignifies “contra-poſitionem in aequalifitu, “ diſpoſitione, forma, magnitudine, jure;” and ſays alſo, (Obſervat. in Joh. cap. i. p. 88.) that by the “fellow” of a man muſt be under- ſtood a man, and by the “fellow” of Jehovah one that is what Jeho- vah is.-Glaſs. Philol. Sac. de Nom. pag. IoA. “virum mihi proxi- “mum, quaſi dicat, quieſt alter ego, qui eſt in finu meo,” Joh. i. 18. “ qui eſt charaćter hypoſtaſeos meat,” &c. Heb. i. 3. We are direéted by the marginal reference to John x. 30. xiv. Io, I I. Phil. ii. 6. In the laſt of theſe places the Apoſtle attributes three ſeveral ſtates to Chriſt : firſt, the form of God; then, the form of a ſervant; then, a ſtate of exaltation. With the expreſſion of Zechariah compare the charaćter which the Apoſtle gives of the firſt of the three, i, port; Osg ºráezov, 3x &praygº, ºyńaaro tº ºvo, ico. Osº. As to the phraſe &prayºr ºyżczºro, ſee the note of Mr. Toup on papſe twº; it&rtép.svos. Longin. de Subl. Sečt, iv. p. 1 1, gel, 176 On the Angelical Meſſage gel, for by the ſacred writer to the Hebrews he is proved properly and naturally ſuperior to An- gels. It remains our only conſtruction, that if, being man, he was yet the “follow” of the Lord of hoſts, he partook of a nature which was neither human nor angelical, but uncreated and divine. By the application which Chriſt has partly made of the foregoing paſſage to his Paſſion, he ſeems, in fact, to have admitted that the prophet had truly repreſented the Lord of hoſts as ſtiling him “the man that is my fellow.” We may proceed, however, from a conſtrućtion that moſt probably was his, to an expreſs declaration of his own. “Have I been ſo long time with you, “ and yet haſt thou not known me, Philip : He “ that hath ſeen me hath ſeen the Father ; and “how ſayeſt thou, ſhew us the Father? Believeſt “ thou not, that I am in the Father, and the Fa- “ ther in me? The words that I ſpeak unto you, “I ſpeak not of myſelf; but the Father that “ dwelleth in me, he doeth the works; believe “ me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in “ me.” As man, he had been long known to Philip by ſenſible evidence; but by the evidence of faith he might have been known to be more than man : but the diſciple had it yet to learn, that the divinity of the Father was in him, as really as it was in the Father, and was as far vi- ſible, as far cognizable, in the one as in the other. From his own aſſertion here it may be diſcerned with to the Pirgin Mary. 177 with what truth and on what account the Lord of hoſts might ſtile him, “ the man that is my “ fellow.” - The Apoſtle John aſſerts, that “God laid down “ his life for us!.” If the Redeemer who died had been man only, it could not be ſaid that God laid down for us a life that was perſonally his own; and God could not be ſaid to lay down a life, that was thus his own, and yet muſt be the life of man, unleſs there were in one perſon Deity to devote, and Humanity to die. From the divinity in Chriſt his miracles proceeded; on the human nature his ſufferings lay ; by death his human ſoul and body were divided, yet his human and divine nature were ſtill in union, al- though not bodily. The “temple of his body” was raiſed again by his divinity, and thus “ the “fulneſs of the Godhead bodily” dwelt in him again. Such was his perſon when he aſcended, and ſuch it will be when he returns to complete his vićtory over Death, the laſt enemy that ſhall be deſtroyed. From the repreſentation of the prophets, from the charaćteriſtical titles in the meſſage of the Angel, from the import in which the Son of the Virgin claimed and aſſumed them, and from the ! So, A&ts ii. 28. from whence Jortin ſuppoſes Ignatius, Ep. ad Eph. took his expreſſion, iv aſpar, Os3. From which paſſage alone, even if there were not others in the ſhort Epiſtles of Ignatius, it ſeems ſufficiently clear that the doćtrine of the Divinity of the Re deemer was not ſtarted by Juſtin, - IN ſubſe- 178 On the Angelical Meſſage ſubſequent Apoſtolical teſtimony, there appears a plain conſent of evidence in ſupport of the following extraćt. - “Thus God exhibited himſelf to men, in the “ perſon of his Son; and he appeared, in the “ſhape and form of man, familiarly to men. “The human nature of the Son of God was “conſecrated into a living temple, by his reſi- “dence in, and union with, it: and God the “Word ſo acquainted himſelf with mortal men, “by the inſtrument of a body, as Euſebius ſays. “He demonſtrated his divine perfections, in the “uſing of our nature. Such a nature as ours, “ which is rational and material, was fit for the “eternal A6).og, for God the Word, to ſhew him- “ ſelf in to men ; and when he ſhewed himſelf, “he ſhewed the moſt high God; for he is God “ of God. Therefore he ſaid, “He that hath ſeen “ me hath ſeen the Father;' and, “He that ſeeth ** me ſeeth him that ſent me.’ tº “Thus was God gloriouſly and ſenſibly mani- “ feſted unto men; when he came down to “ men, in the likeneſs of man, and in our nature “diſcovered his own. And when he appeared “in human nature, he diſcovered himſelf by di- “vine works, and his glory was diſcloſed by his “ actions. If any one looked upon the man “Chriſt Jeſus, there was no ſenſible glory about “ his head, that might diſtinguiſh him from “others; but there was an intelle&tual luſtre, “with which wiſdom and goodneſs adorned him, - * “ His to the Pirgin Mary. 1 79 & 6 & & & & & 4 © & 6 & ( & 6 & & & & & & 6 & & © & & & 6 & & & & & & 6 £ 6 & 6 6 & & & & 4 £ 6 & & & 6 6 < & & © & & 4 • 6 His words and deeds were ſuch, as mere man never did exhibit; and upon his ſpeeches and actions there were marks of divinity viſible. His miracles were ſuch, as no power, but that of God, could do ; and with them he enter- tained and aftoniſhed the minds of men, who expreſſed their admiration, ſaying, ‘What man- ner of man is this ' Beſides, theſe miracles were all acts of love; and men were affected at them, as at the obſervation of greatneſs and goodneſs. At the ſame time, the obliged and amazed multitude were entertained by the di- ‘ vine reaſon with diſcourſes full of wiſdom and virtue, ſuch as were moſt worthy of God, and moſt profitable to men. Thoſe who heard him ſpeak ſuch wiſdom as never man ſpake ſaw him live ſuch virtue as never man lived; and celeſtial holineſs clothed the Son of man with glory. He was thus a living law of virtue, and the ſubſtantial doćtrine of wiſdom, and a ſenſi- ble manifeſtation of power; and yet a man, like unto us in all things, except thoſe glories, and except our vicious infirmities. Here, then, was human nature in view, and human con- verſation obſervable : but in all this, a divine wiſdom, goodneſs, and power, did appear. Here was the life of God exhibited in the na- ture of men; and the inviſible divinity did ap- pear, veiled in the ſenſibleneſs of humanity. His converſation was familiar, and yet ſtupen- dous; and every appearance was wonderful, N 2 ‘‘ but 180 On the Angelical Meſſage, &c. “but not terrible. Such a manifeſtation of God “ there was, as obliged men to the greateſt ve- “neration of him ; and what the Son of God “ did was moſt God-like. Such an one is he, “who is the ſupreme in the ſpiritual kingdom “ of God; and none other was either worthy or “fit to be ſupreme, but he, who by his appear- “ance could ſhew us the Father, and reconcile “us unto him. - - “We know in whom we believe, and in whom “we confide; to whom we ſubjećt our con- “ſciences, and from whom we expect our ſalva- “tion. It is from that glorious and divine per- “ ſon, who is the Son of God ; and it is from “God “ manifeſted in the fleſh.” Such is the “perſon, and ſuch is the glory, of the ſupreme “Lord.” - ON THE PROPHECIES AND TESTIMONY OF JOHN THE BAPTIST, A. N. D. THE PARAT, I, EL PRO PHE CIF S OF JESUS CHRIST. N 3 O N T H E PROPHE CIES AND TESTIMONY OF JOHN THE BAPTIST, A N ID THE PARALLEL PROPHE CIES O F JESUS CHRIST. PART I. S E C T I O N I. The general deſign of this Treatiſe ſtated—the Jews admitted the Baptiſt to be a prophet—but without any reference to the Meſſiah—this con- tradićted the divine purpoſe. THE hiſtory of Chriſt, as ſuch, was admirably adapted to give the moſt clear and venerable re- preſentation of Chriſtianity, and at the ſame time an obvious and frequent a demonſtration of its * An anſwer is given to the enquiry, why Chriſtianity was deli- vered in a hiſtory, in preference to any other form, in a Commence- ment Sermon, Jeffery's Tracts, vol. ii. at the end, N 4 truth. 184 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony truth. For, as the ſyſtem of duty, contained in his moral and religious diſcourſes, was in him viſibly exemplified; ſo alſo, a conſiderable part of the evidence that he came from God ariſes from the ſeveral acts and incidents of his public life. There are two queſtions, that have immediate reference to them ; the one relates to their real exiſtence, and the other reſpects the proofs which they afford of a divine atteſtation. As to the firſt of theſe two queſtions nothing will be offered here, as that ſubječt has been al- ready conſidered in a foregoing treatiſe. But, appealing without reſerve to the Evange- lical writings, as authentic hiſtories of real fact, I ſhall proceed to ſtate the drift and ſubſtance of the argument to be purſued in theſe pages. The deſign is, to produce and illuſtrate the prophecy and teſtimony of John the Baptiſt re- ſpecting Jeſus, and the parallel prophecies of Je- ſus himſelf; and to urge them jointly in ſupport of the divine miſſion of both. *. This is the general ſcheme in view ; the par- ticular points of diſcuſſion will be ſtated as they occur. Let me now endeavour to ſhew, that the Jews really admitted the prophetical charaćter of the Baptiſt. - With reſpect to the general reception of John as a prophet, it may be obſerved that Jewiſh b * Joſephus, and Joſeph ben Gorion, or Joſippon. See Lardner, Jewiſh and Heathen Teſtimonies. hiſtorians of John the Baptiſt. 185 hiſtorians atteſt his adminiſtration of baptiſm, and appropriate to him that very title, drawn from his office, by which he is diſtinguiſhed in the Goſpels, and aſſign the reign of Herod Anti- pas as the date, and the land of Judaea as the ſcene, of his baptiſmal miniſtry, and further in- timate, that a multitude of Jews received his baptiſm. - The teſtimony given by Joſephus in particu- lar, to the public miniſtry and general veneration of the Baptiſt, will have the greater weight in behalf of the Goſpel, which began in the bap- tiſm of John, from the agreement which ſubſiſts between the ſacred writers and him, in their ac- count, not only of the miniſtry and extraordinary ſucceſs of John, but alſo of other circumſtances reſpecting the character and the objects of his baptiſm, of which notice will be taken here- after. This hiſtorian informs us, that John had con- ciliated the affection and reverence of the people to ſo great a degree, that his popularity alarmed the king; and that the deſtruction of his army was publicly reputed a juſt act of divine ven- geance againſt him, for ſhedding the blood of John. Agreeably to this account, we learn from the Goſpels, that Herod, although he ventured to ſhut up John in priſon, yet permitted his diſciples to continue their intercourſe with him ; and for a long 186 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony long time, through feare of the people, and per- ſonald reſpect for the Baptiſt, forbore to deprive him of life; and at laſt gave him up with the greateſt reluctance to the ſanguinary malice of Herodias. - The great Council of the Jews, which aſſumed and exerciſed the right of examining and deter- mining every claim to a prophetical commiſſion, ſent a ſolemn deputation of Levites to the Bap- tiſt, to enquire into the truth of his pretenſions. The turn of their queſtions implies a perſuaſion in the meſſengers, that John was a real prophet; “Art thou Elias " “Art thou that prophet?” They did not enquire whether God had ſent him, but rather in what divine character he came ; and they did not demand, “Why bap- “tizeſt thou then,” until he had already diſ- claimed both the divine characters, one or other of which they had imagined might belong to him. And after all, though his anſwer probably gave offence to the Council, yet they did not venture to condemn him as a falſe prophet. In- deed, the danger was great of diſowning his miſſion from God, and depreciating his baptiſm; “Ife we ſhall ſay, it was of men, all the people “will ſtone us, for they be perſuaded that John “ was a prophet,” is the language held by them- ſelves. * Matth. xiv. 5. * Mark vi. 20. * Luke xx. 5, 6. The of John the Baptiſt. 187 The principal circumſtances, which can be drawn either from the Scripture, or from the ac- count of Joſephus, have ſufficient agreement, to ſhew that the character of the Baptiſt was gene- rally believed prophetical. The lateſt f of the two Jewiſh hiſtorians expreſsly calls him a pro- phet; and, whether this writer was a Jew in reality or in pretence only, it ſeems to be equally certain, that he has given the true Jewiſh opinion concerning John. If he be eſteemed a real Jew, then he ought alſo to be reckoned a credible judge and witneſs of the current notions of his countrymen; but, on the contrary, if it be ſup- poſed that he perſonated a Jewiſh charaćter, and that in a very late period, it may then be ob- ſerved, that the reception and credit of his hiſto- ry among the Jews, even in preference to that of Joſephus, ſufficiently ſhews that they juſtify and authenticate the ſubſtance of his ſtory. The belief of the inſpiration of John ſeems to have been generally entertained without any view to the Meſſiah. For in the Goſpels g men- tion is made of diſciples, that ſtill adhered to and viſited the Baptiſt in the priſon, when Chriſt was in the full exerciſe of his miniſtry; and of others, who obſerved exactly the frequent faſts which John had preſcribed, and, as it appears, blamed Chriſt and his followers for their diſuſe * Joſippon is ſuppoſed to have written about the eleventh century. Lardner, ubi ſupra. - - g Matth. ix. I4. xi. 2. Of 188 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony of ſimilar reſtrićtions. We find alſo, in the Aćts" of the Apoſtles, that Apollos and ſome Jews, whom St. Paul met with at Epheſus, knew and had received only the baptiſm of John. All the Jews of this deſcription, as they ſeem to have believed the prophetical charaćter of the Baptiſt, could have no other ground for admit- ting it, except that upon which he was ſingly conſidered, and independent of the Meſfiah. The immediate queſtion then will be, upon what evi- dence the inſpiration of John was acknowledged by thoſe, who either overlooked or violated the connection between him and the Meſſiah ; and whether that evidence was, or was not, ſufficient to juſtify entirely the concluſion they drew. Let us therefore endeavour in the next place, if it be poſſible, to diſcover ſome of their reaſons. In the plainneſs of his habit, and the exact abſtinence of his life, which are diſtinétly markedi by the Evangeliſts, the Baptiſt carried all the outward appearances of a prophetical character. His diſtinguiſhed holineſs, and the fervent and authoritative ſtile in which he rebuked the vices and the finners of his time, would naturally en- gage the utmoſt reſpect and veneration of all, who were religiouſly diſpoſed. And as the com- munication between God and his people ſeemed to be renewed of late, by the return of a mira- * xviii. 24. xix. 2. * See Grotius on Matth. iii. 4. Compare Zech. xiii. 4. 2 Kings i. 8. I Chron, xxi. 16. culous of John the Baptiſt. 189 culous power at the waters of Betheſdak, the Jews would perhaps be inclined to expect the revival of prophecy among them, and, on finding the reputed characteriſtics' of a prophetical ſpirit in the Baptiſt, might be the more ready to attri- bute inſpiration to him. This impreſſion in favour of John might alſo be confirmed by his miniſtry of Baptiſm, and by his call to Repentance. For the principles of the Jews would naturally diſpoſe them to take eſpecial notice of both theſe particulars. - Baptiſm had long been in uſe among the Jews; and it was adminiſtered by John in the cuſtomary form. Their fathers had been baptized unto Moſes m, or unto that diſpenſation of religion and worſhip, which God eſtabliſhed among them - by the miniſtry of Moſes; and as under the Mo- ſaic law, the “old world,” as they termed it, Baptiſm had been their rite of original admiſſion; ſo alſo from their conſtruction of the prophecies, and from popular tradition, they might look for the ſame mode of initiation n to the “ new “ world” ” under the Meſſiah. * John v. 4. ! Vorſtius enumerates fix concomitants or antecedents of prophecy —among them were; Sequeſtration from the common and profane manner of living—Seaſonableneſs of the time: for they held all times not equally ſeaſonable. Ad Maimonid. de fund. Leg. c. 7. m I Corinth. x. 2. Heb. ix. 19. Lightfoot, Har. Part I. pag. 466. * See Grot. on John i. 25.-But a baptiſm, like that of John, to initiate them to a new religion, ſeems not to have been expected. • Lightfoot, Har, Part I. pag. 9. et paſſim. The 190 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony The call to Repentance agreed equally with their preconceptions. The maxim was received among them', if Iſrael repent but one day, pre- ſently the Redeemer cometh. - Whether they entertained juſt notions of Bap- tiſm and Repentance, or otherwiſe, is not conſi- dered here; but the preſent queſtion is, ſimply, whether the uſe of Baptiſm, and the call to Re- pentance, were likely to be deemed the accom- pliſhment of their own traditions, and on that account apparent indications of a prophetical ſpirit in the Baptiſt; and this perhaps may be conceivable. But the preſumption of the inſpiration of John, in whatſoever degree the circumſtances hitherto mentioned can be ſuppoſed to have ſug- geſted it, would be conſiderably ſtrengthened by the univerſal expectation of the Meſſiah. Syria had been ſubdued, and annexed to the great em- pire of Rome; and as the time, which had been limited in the prophecy of Daniel", was con- feſſedly elapſed, the kingdom of the God of heaven, under Meſſiah the Prince, which he had foretold, was expected immediately to appear. The univerſal prevalence of this expectation in Iſrael at that time, has been indiſputably ſhewn by writers both ſacred and profane. “The “ kingdom of heaven is at hand,” was therefore P Lightfoot, vol. ii. Har. Part I. pag. Io. 4 Chap. ix. * Luke xix. 11. Sueton, in Veſp. c. 4. a notice, of John the Baptiſt. 19 i a notice, likely to ſtrengthen every previous ſup- poſition of an inſpired charaćter in the Baptiſt. But above all, the miraculous circumſtances, that attended the conception and infancy of John, would, if generally known, greatly facilitate his admiſſion as a prophet. When they happened, “fear” came on all, and theſe ſayings were “ noiſed abroad throughout all the hill-country: “ and all they that heard them laid them up in “ their hearts, ſaying, What manner of child ſhall “ this be " The report of theſe circumſtances might be revived, upon the coming of John to baptize ſo near thoſe parts; and, as the people grew daily more and more diſpoſed to muſe and enquire concerning him, a knowledge of them would be likely to take a wider extent. If ſo, as it would immediately occur that John twas of the line of Aaron, and by right of birth a prieſt of the God of Iſrael, as Joſippon u expreſsly calls him, theſe miraculous circumſtances would in- deed have a powerful effect in perſuading the public, that his baptiſm was from heaven, and not of men. Indeed, neither of the prophecies, by the Angels and Zachariasy, reſpecting the real office of John, ſeems to have been regarded, or known. If that had been the caſe, his true charaćter, and the relation between him and the * Luke i. 65. * Luke i. 1. * Gorionides Joannem hunc prophetam vocat. Grot, ad Matth. xi. 9. ,’t 2. uke i. 17, - y Luke i. 76, Meſſiah, 192 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Meſſiah, could ſcarcely have paſſed, as it did, without notice and effect. But ſtill, even a ru- mour, however indiſtinét, that the birth of the Baptiſt had been foretold, and his name dićtated by an Angel, who appeared to Zacharias during his ſacerdotal courſe in the Temple, would add very conſiderable weight to every other ſuppoſed evidence of the divine miſſion of John, and might poſſibly determine the Jews, without further he- ſitation, to admit his prophetical character. If, then, the real ſtate of the Jewiſh opinions and expectations, at the time, be conſidered, theſe ſeveral circumſtances, when taken in aid of each other, will probably appear ſufficient to have raiſed a general preſumption, that John was a prophet”; and that they ſhould operate ſo far as to attach the people to him, and diſpoſe them to receive his baptiſm in the true ſpirit of it, and to expect with repentance and faith the coming of the Meſſiah, whom he predićted, ſeems to have been the divine intention. But then, to treat this preſumption as if it were abſolute certainty, and to admit the pro- phetical character of the Baptiſt upon this pro- bable evidence, excluſive of all other to be given in future, tended immediately to contradict the counſel of God. It led many of the Jews to break the intended connection between the Bap- * His ſucceſs, even in that partial degree, to which it extended, was the completion of prophecy. Malachi iv. 5, 6. Luke i. 17. tiſt of John the Baptiſt. 193 trſt and the Meſſiah, and to look no farther than John ; and of courſe they muſt have acquieſced in ſuch evidence of his inſpiration, as their li- mited view afforded. But all their proofs of the prophetical character of John, ſuppoſing him ſingly conſidered, whether they aroſe from the circumſtances already recited, or from any other, fell ſhort of that complete and deciſive evidence, which God had provided ; and when they ad- mitted John, as a prophet, upon any preſumptive ground alone, however ſtrong, they had much yet to learn both of his credentials and his office. His inſpiration could be abſolutely aſcertained only by another and a ſubſequent evidence; and what that was is a material queſtion, and will make the next article of our enquiry. SECTION II. Genuine evidence of the divine miſſion of the Bap- tiſt—conneétion between him and the Meſſiah neceſſary—John not a Prophet, unleſs he were the Forerunner of the Meſſiah. THE uſual means of authenticating a divine miſſion were not given to John. He did no mi- racle ; and, on that account, if he really was the meſſenger of God, there muſt have been other O €WI- 194 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony evidence, upon which his prophetical character could be, and therefore ought to have been, de- termined. If he had no ſuch deciſive evidence in his favour, however ſtrong a preſumption of his divine commiſſion might ariſe from other cir- cumſtances, yet muſt it lie open to queſtion, as God had never failed to give an indiſputable at- teſtation to every real prophet. Upon that foot- ing, the Baptiſt, as not being inveſted with a mi- raculous power, would have been left without any concluſive evidence of his miſſion from God; and the Jews, if their own experience in the caſes of former prophets influenced their judg- ment, would have queſtioned the prophetical charaćter of any claimant, who wanted the means of proving it undeniably certain, and could only. render it probable. - The truth in the caſe before us appears to be this. The providence of God, as if to prevent the very miſtake which was made by the Jews, did not authenticate the miſſion of John by any indubitable proof that was excluſively perſonal to him. Such the power of working miracles would have been. The only deciſive evidence that John was a real prophet aroſe out of his relation to the Meſſiah; in Him it began, and was reflected back upon the Baptiſt. It was his appointed province to prepare the way for One Mightier, that ſhould come, and to make him manifeſt unto Iſrael. The unqueſtionable right of the Baptiſt to a prophetical character could there- of John the Baptiſt. 105 therefore be ſhewn only by the abſolute appear- ance of that Mightier One, for whom he pre- pared the way. If he had ſpoken of One to come, who came not; or had appropriated cha- raēters to him, which, if he came, he did not ſuſtain ; or had attributed works to him, which he did not accompliſh ; it would have been rea- ſonably concluded, in oppoſition to all other evi- dence, that he really bore no divine commiſſion. But, on the contrary, if the predictions of the Baptiſt concerning the ſpeedy appearance, office, and works of Him who was to come were veri- fied; from that accompliſhment would reſult one real proof that John himſelf was a prophet, and therefore entitled to the fulleſt credit in the wit- neſs he had given to Jeſus. According to this repreſentation, though the uſual evidence of miracles was not appointed as the proof that the word of the Lord came to John, yet another, and that deciſive in the queſ- tion, was granted to him. This was prophecy; but not prophecy of ſuch a caſt, as to leave the point, which it was intended to aſcertain, for a conſiderable interval of time in ſuſpence and un- determined. It was prophecy, not with remote, but nearly preſent accompliſhment; it was not as a light ſhining long in a dark place, but the dawn haſted on, and the day-ſtar ſoon aroſe. The matter was placed upon the proper ground by ſome of the Jews, in one inſtance, which is O 2 - thus 196 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony thus recorded by an Evangeliſt. “Jeſus a went “away again beyond Jordan, unto the place “ where John at firſt baptized, and there he “ abode. And many reſorted unto him, and “ ſaid, John did no miracle; but all things that “John ſpake of this man were true.” The place reminded them of former teſtimonies to the Meſfiah, which they had heard the Baptiſt deliver there; and this recollection produced in them a natural and reaſonable effect; for the Evangeliſt adds, “ and many believed on him “ there.” They ſaw and felt the true evidence of the prophetical charaćter of John ; and they were immediately led by their juſt views to pro- ceed one ſtep further than many of their coun- trymen, and to admit the divine miſſion of Jeſus, as well as that of John. * I have thus endeavoured to ſhew, that the ground, upon which thoſe Jews, who looked no farther than the Baptiſt, attributed an inſpired character to him, was partial; and have ſtated what appears the full evidence of it, to which they ought to have extended their views, that it might be the more diſtinétly ſeen, with what admirable ſtrictneſs the credentials of the Baptiſt were adjuſted to the nature and deſign of his office. And as this point ſeems of conſequence in any account of the teſtimony of the Baptiſt to * John K. 41, 42–See Chemnit. Harm. Evang, lib. v. pag, Io. Jeſus, of John the Baptiſt. 1 97 Jeſus, let me be allowed to ſubjoin a ſhort illuſ- tration of it. Many prophets, and eſpecially Elias, in whoſe ſpirit and power the Baptiſt came, had been en- abled to work miracles. They ſtood as ſingle objects; and the public attention was to be drawn and continued to them alone. The exerciſe of a miraculous power would therefore directly facili- tate their admiſſion, in the character of divine meſſengers. But the caſe was different with the Baptiſt. The exerciſe of a miraculous power, as it muſt tend to fix the eyes of the people exclu- fively upon him, would have counteracted the real purpoſe of his office, which was intended to manifeſt Another unto Iſrael. And as the Jews ſtood moſt in need of an inducement to look be- yond the Baptiſt, the concluſive evidence of his divine miſſion was of that particular nature, which was beſt calculated to carry their views forward to the Meſſiah. A perſuaſion that John really was a prophet generally prevailed; this ſeems to be clear from the Jewiſh hiſtorians. But the Scriptures alone aſſign the ground, upon which that perſuaſion could be completely juſtified. According to them, neither the prophetical notice of the Baptiſt, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” nor the preceding prophecies of the Angel and Zacha- rias, could be verified, except in the actual com- ing of the Meſſiah; and all deciſive evidence of the inſpiration of John would therefore, as it O 3 ſeems, 198 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ſeems, be excluded, if the Baptiſt were confi- dered independently of Him. - A neceſſary connection appears then to have ſubſiſted between them ; and their credentials ſeem to have been unavoidably involved ſo far, that the divine miſſion of Both was to be aſcer- tained at one inſtant, and in one event. The Baptiſt opened his miniſtry in the charaćter of Forerunner; and it was not poſſible to prove him even a Prophet, except from that very inci- dent, which would alſo prove him the Forerun- ner. So evidently was it provided, that the Bap- tiſt could not fail to authenticate the divine miſ- fion of the Meſſiah, by the ſame means, and in the ſame degree, wherein he eſtabliſhed his OWI1. s - The credibility of the Goſpel-hiſtory of the Baptiſt will perhaps be confirmed, and his teſti- mony to Jeſus enforced, if it has now been ſhewn with any ſucceſs, that, although John certainly was received as a prophet, yet his cha- raēter could not be proved prophetical, if it were any other than that, which the Goſpel-writers repreſent it, of Forerunner to the Meſſiah. SECTION of John the Baptiſt. 109 SECTION III. The prophetical chara&#er of John ſhewn from his baptiſmal doctrine—his motice, “the kingdom “ of heaven is at hand”—Jewiſh motions of that kingdom—the true notion of it implied in John's baptiſmal doctrine—caution with reſpect to his baptiſm attributed to John by Joſephus. IT has been ſhewn, that the divine miſſion of the Baptiſt, however ſtrongly it might be pre- ſumed, could not be completely aſcertained, if he were conſidered ſingly, and independently of the Meſſiah. If he did not really bear that cha- raćter of Forerunner to One Mightier who was to come, which the Goſpel-writers attribute to him, there could be no deciſive evidence that he came from God. Let me now proceed to ſhew, that ſufficient evidences of his prophetical b character might have been diſcovered and accumulated, by con- b Evidence of a divine miſſion may ariſe from one or more of the following circumſtances. Iſt, From explaining former prophecies, ſo as to imply ſuch a clear and comprehenſive knowledge of the events, predićted therein, that it could not reaſonably be aſcribed to the unaffitted faculties of man ; Or, 2dly, from declaring that the accompliſhment of prophecies was immediately approaching; Or, 3dly, from repeating the prophecies themſelves, with new and addi- tional circumſtances; Or, laſtly, from delivering predićtions entirely original. Frequent occaſion will ariſe of applying one or other of theſe criteria. O 4 ſiderin g 200 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ſidering him as ſent to prepare the way of the Lord. ' And to this end it will be my endeavour to illuſtrate the baptiſmal doćtrine of John, as far as it reſpected the kingdom of heaven, and the people of Iſrael. As John, by both his parents, was of the line of Aaron, he was by right of birth a prieſt of the God of Iſrael. When he attained the proper age for commencing his miniſtry, he declined the ſer- vice of the Sanétuary, and forſook the Church of Iſrael; but aſſumed and publicly exerciſed a ſacerdotal office, in obedience, as he profeſſed, to the word of the Lord. Baptiſm was the only one of the Jewiſh ceremonies, which he re- tained ; but of this he kept only the form. That the purpoſe, to which he applied it, was new and original, may be, collected from his baptiſmal doćtrine. The leading points of it ſhew that the Holy Ghoſt, with which John had been filled from the womb, imparted to him juſt views of the religious ſtate of Iſrael, at that time; and enabled him to predićt the character- iſtical principles and nature of the Goſpel-king- dom, which he declared to be at hand, together with the divine rejection of the Jews, and adop- tion of the Gentiles. - “The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” was the awakening notice, upon which his baptiſmal exhortation was grounded. The expreſſion itſelf was not ſtrange to his hearers, nor the intelli- gence, which he gave them, unexpected. It coincided of John the Baptiſt. 2O1 coincided with the popular opinion ; and as, in the Jewiſh ſenſe, it was extremely pleaſing, the completion of it was impatiently deſired. We may therefore imagine, that the Baptiſt was readily underſtood to announce the approach of the Meſſiah". The phraſe ſeems to be thus in- terpreted in many paſſages of Scripture; and John applied it in the greateſt latitude, to denote the whole oeconomy of things under the Meſ- ſiah. But the Baptiſt and his audience entirely diſ- agreed in their notion of that ſtate. The opi- nion, which the Jews entertained of it, may perhaps, on the authority of their own writers as well as of the Scripture, be juſtly ſtated in the ſubſequent particulars. They expected that the ſplendor d and ſo- lemnity of their civil and religious conſtitution would then be raiſed to the utmoſt heighte; and * Matth. xii. 28. xvi. 19. Luke xvii. 20, 21. Lightfoot, vol. i. pag. 568. —Whitby, Matth. iii. 2.—32ciasſow irrat Sa rºw wopeaſay 2013 (Xºroú) rºw re wearápa, ſº rºw iºrºw Aiye. Chryſoſt. Hom. X. in Matth. loc. cit. * Maimonides ſays, the Jews expe&ted, that the nations, rouſed at the exhortation of the Meſfiah, would turn to the Law. See Light- foot, Harmony, Ift part, pag. I4. • It was expected that the Meſſiah ſhould reſtore the kingdom of the houſe of David to its old glory, and build the temple, and bring home all the diſperſed of Iſrael : and that Iſrael ſhould then be at reſt from the kingdom of wickedneſs, to ſtudy the Law and the Commandments without diſquietude. Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 568. from Maimonides. Perhaps there are traces of this opinion in the Goſ- pels. John Xi. 52. Scripture 202 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Scripture had been ſtrained to juſtify that fond belief, which zeal for the Law had ſuggeſted, and the voice of tradition had confirmed. They pre- fumcd alſo that the diſperſed f of Iſrack would be gathered together in their own land, and that the bleſſings of the Meſfiah's kingdom would be conferred upon them by right of deſcent from Abraham, and by virtue of the divine promiſe, to the excluſion * of all other nations. They ex- pećted further, that the oppreſſion of the king- doms would then ceaſe; and that not only po- litical liberty, but alſo political dominion, would be reſtored to Iſrael. Thus had they repreſented the kingdom of heaven to themſelves; and that blindneſs of mind and hardneſs of heart, for which they were reproved ſo ſeverely and have now ſuffered ſo lohg, may be ultimately reſolved into theſe prin- ciples. How greatly they miſtook their own re- ligious ſtate, and the nature of the Meſſiah’s kingdom, that repreſentation of both, which is given by the Baptiſt, will ſufficiently diſ- COWer. He “preached the Baptiſm of Repentance:” * John viii. 39.-It ſhall be the morning to Iſrael, but night to the nations of the world—Iſrael in the time to come (i. e. the days of the Meſfiah) ſhall be left only, and there ſhall be with him no ſtrange God—are Jewiſh traditions, produced from their writers, by Lightfoot. Vol. i. pag. 14. * Luke xxiv. 21. Aćts i. 6.—Lardner, Cred. of G. H. b. i. ch, 5. but of John the Baptiſt. 2O3 but that which was in uſe among the Jews de- ſerves rather to be named the baptiſm of Obe- dience. “This ſhall be thy righteouſneſs h,” was the language of the Law to the candidate for admiſſion; and although the burden to which he ſubmitted was grievous, yet the obligation he incurred was ſtrićt—“Curſed is every one, that “ continueth not in all things, which are written “ in the book of the Law, to do them.” The cere- monial part of the Law at length engroſſed the po- pular attention and reverence, and ritual obedience paſſed for true religion; and, in direct conformity to this principle, it was imagined that Abraham obtained the promiſe through the righteouſneſs of works. Thoſe notions of repentance, which they entertained, had not led them to admit any inſufficiency in the Legal atonements, or to feel and confeſs their ſinful and unforgiven ſtate. Among them repentance was of courſe merely formal, without power, and entirely unproduc- tive of fruits worthy of it. - Under this perverſion of things, when the public eſteem for the moral law had entirely de- clined, repentance, in the true ſenſe of it, could have no place, as a principle of action. Before it could operate, the current of the prevailing opinions muſt be turned, and a due preference reſtored of the moral to the ritual law. This * Deuteron. iv. 1. vi. 25. xxvii. 26. xxx. 15. 19. Ezekiel xx. 1 1. Galat. iii, Io. among 204 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony among other effects was reſerved for a new diſ- penſation, which would eſtabliſh the righteouſ- neſs of the heart, and not of the letter, and would annex the divine ſanction and bleſſing to a ſpiritual ſervice. The baptiſm of repentance was ſtrićtly ac- commodated to a people in this ſtate of moral corruption, and ſuited only a diſpenſation of this caſt. Accordingly, when the Baptiſt propoſed it, he acted from views, imparted to him by the Holy Spirit, of the depraved and unforgiven ſtate of Iſrael, however weakly felt, or hardily diſ- claimed: he alſo prophetically intimated, what would be the great pervading principle and cha- racter of that diſpenſation, which he prepared them to receive; and repreſented it, not as a law of works, but as a kingdom of grace; for his bap- tiſm preceded as a ſign of repentance, and would, if duly acted upon, lead on to ſubſequent remiſ- ſion of ſin. Joſephus i attributes to the Baptiſt a cau- tion, againſt a miſtake that might be made re- ſpecting the nature of his baptiſm, as it ſeems, in this very particular. God would accept it, he taught, in behalf of thoſe “who uſed it, not as “an excuſe for their fins, but to purification * Joſeph. Antiq. Jud. lib. xviii. cap. 7. Otro y&p zoº rºw 3&rriat, * 3. *g * * e &ro?ixthy air; (9e3) poveto Sai, tº in: twov &p.2gráðwy wraparróa's Xpw- 3. & * *Nº. ** Pºirov, &AW iſ &yveſ: rs agazvoz, &rs 3% ;3 rº; Jºvzī; 3xxiozów, wrotºxi- x2%26piºns. * ** Of of John the Baptiſt. 2O 5 “ of the body, as implying the previous purifica- “tion of the heart by righteouſneſs.” There is a remarkable ſimilarity between the concluding part of this paſſage in Joſephus, and the words of the Apoſtle Peterk concerning baptiſm; “Not “ the putting away of the filth of the fleſh, but “ the anſwer of a good conſcience toward God.” And that repreſentation of John's baptiſm, which is given by the Jewiſh writer, agrees with that of the Evangeliſts. They have not charaćterized it as the baptiſm of remiſſion of fins, but fimply of repentance, introdućtory to it. According to the prophecy of Zacharias it was the office of the Baptiſt “to give knowledge of ſalvation by the “ remiſſion of ſins;” but it is not ſaid, that he was to give the ſalvation, or the remiſſion of ſins. He baptized with water unto repentance, without! preſuming to ſanétify by the baptiſmal water, or to confer remiſſion of ſins upon re- pentance. Joſephus therefore ſketches the real nature and ſpirit of John's baptiſm, when he repreſents it to imply, by purification of the body, the pre- vious purification of the heart. He ſtates indeed only part of the truth; but he has preſerved * I Pet. iii. 21. * Theophylačt, on Matt. iii. "Apsaw &gapriºr otz six: rö 'Iwówov 84wrizza, &x^2 gamy pºstavoſa, ixáſurrey Iwºns, º sis 3¢saw guagrº, #Pigey, cºwri Tä, eig tº ra Xfirs flºrrigº.o. 23%xts, "rap 3% & peak # &p.o.prºv. See alſo Chryſoſtom, Homil. 74, tom. v. pag. 525. Suicer. Theſ, in voc. 347trapaz. enough 206 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony enough of it to render his teſtimony valuable, and, as far as it goes, it appears directly appoſite. According to him, John cautioned the people, that his baptiſm had not any privilege of propi- tiating God for fin; and the Goſpels inform us, that he aſcribed this great prerogative to One Mightier, that ſhould come. As it is agreed there- fore on both ſides, that he diſclaimed this privilege for himſelf, it ſeems fairly to reſult from the Jewiſh, as well as the Evangelical hiſtory, that the baptiſm of John was ſimply of a preparatory nature, and implied that remiſſion of ſin was yet reſerved for other and higher agency. But when he adminiſtered baptiſm, as intro- dućtory in any degree to the remiſſion of fins, the queſtion, whether the votaries of the Law ſtood already in a ſtate of ſalvation, was by him decided againſt the Jews. The Legal purifica- tions and atonements, which the original ſanc- tion of God, and the certainty, which they were preſumed to give of acceptance and favour with him, had concurred to ſupport and endear, were now depreciated as invalid; and warning WàS given that juſtification m with God muſt be ſought for upon other terms. Every plea, which was grounded on obedience to the Law, even ſuppoſing that had been exact, was evidently diſ- allowed. John accordingly propoſed, as an in- diſpenſable and univerſal requiſite, the Baptiſm * IIzpatroaty dwagtaºay, as Joſephus calls it. of of John the Baptiſt. 2O7 of repentance, to open the way to ſubſequent re- miſſion of ſins. It was a ſeal of the righteouſ- neſs of faith in the Meſſiah who was to come; and the acceptance and efficacy of it depended upon Him, whoſe blood would waſh away fin, and whoſe Baptiſm of the Spirit would internally purify. As this was the main object of that Faith, which was propoſed by John to his diſci- ples, of courſe they who received his baptiſm ceaſed to be under the Law. It was the counſel of God to bring them into the path of ſalvation; and they who reſolved to abide by their old prin- ciples and profeſſion would rejećt it againſt themſelves. SECTION IV. The principles of John's baptiſmal doctrine im- plied a divine communication to him—the grounds of his call to Repentance—they were ſuch as implied a divine revelation to him. THUS the miniſtry of John proceeded upon principles excluſive of the Law, and entirely Evangelical. Jeſus afterwards enforced them in his conference with Nicodemus ; and the import of the Baptiſt's doćtrine appears extremely ſi- milar to the ſubſtance of that intereſting conver- ſation. That maſter of Iſrael knew not theſe things ; 208 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony things; a baptiſm of water unto ſpiritual regene- ration of heart both in principles and practice, as preparatory to admiſſion into the kingdom of the Meſſiah, had never entered his mind; and when it was propoſed, it ſurpaſſed his apprehenſion. Indeed, none of the ancient prophecies, or of thoſe which were neareſt to this time, ſeem to have raiſed any expectation, that can be certainly traced, of ſuch an extraordinary miniſtry as that undertaken by the Baptiſt; at leaſt, a baptiſm of this effect and import was not known to be in the divine intention, till the calling of John. For the prophecies that characterized the office of John, as Forerunner of the Lord, had not been ſo far particular as to aſcribe the uſe of baptiſm to him. The adminiſtration of it appears evi- dently to have been dictated to him by divine revelation, ſince the word of the Lord could alone have enabled him prophetically to repre- ſent the kingdom of heaven, in direct contradic- tion to the Jewiſh conſtruction of the prophecies, as a kingdom entirely ſpiritual, as a ſtate of re- demption and grace, which allowed privilege to none but Penitents. But the call to repentance was grounded by the Baptiſt upon the approach of this kingdom, not only becauſe it would offer remiſſion of fins, but alſo becauſe judgment would coincide therein with grace. He ſtrives to affect the people, firſt by the mercies, and then by “the terror of “ the Lord. ' Accordingly, he queſtions the Sad- ducees of John the Baptiſt. º 200 ducees and Phariſees, who came to his baptiſm, the firſt of whom entertained no belief, and the laſt no fear, of the divine judgment, “Who hath “warned you to flee from the wrath to come * The Holy Ghoſt, with which the Baptiſt had been filled from the womb, might have given him ſome intimation of God's particular diſplea- ſure againſt theſe ſectariſts; but however that may be, the queſtion implies that the baptiſm of John tended to deliverance, and that a ſenſe n of danger was a proper motive for receiving it. It was, in fact, to thoſe who received it, and brought forth fruits worthy of it, a pledge of preſervation from the vengeance impending upon the Jewiſh people. The remark of St. Peter o ſufficiently illuſtrates this point; he compares the deſtruction of Iſrael with that of the old world, when the family of Noah were ſaved by water; and then adds, “The like figure where- “ unto, even baptiſm, doth now ſave us.” The ſtrength and vehemence of the Baptiſt's language evidently denote the extremity of that wrath, which he predicted. “And now alſo,” he cries, “ the axe is laid to the root of the “ trees.” This denunciation correſponded with foregoing prophecies. “Lebanon ſhall fall by a “mighty one”—“Jeruſalem ſhall become heaps, * Mark xvi. 16. Aćts il. 4o. * I Pet. iii. 2 o, 2 I. P ** and 210 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “ and the mountain of the Lord's houſe as the “high places of the foreſt”—and, “ The day “ that cometh ſhall burn them up, it ſhall leave “ them neither root nor branch.” “Every tree “therefore,” the Baptiſt proceeds, “ which “bringeth not forth good fruit, is P hewn down, “ and caſt into the fire.” Their beauty had been more than once given into the hand of the enemy; but now the axe was laid to the root it- ſelf, which had hitherto eſcaped, and entire deſo- lation would enſue. This was a warning of great terror; and that 4 garb of mourning, in which the Baptiſt appeared, and that rigour and ſeverity of life, which he obſerved, were likely to enforce moſt deeply his prophecy of evil tidings. It was indeed commonly believed, that the ruin of the Jewiſh ſtate was predicted in the Scriptures ; and in the days of the Baptiſt it was not ſuppoſed to be very remote. Upon this account, his words were likely to be referred by his audience to that event; and it might have P The preſent tenſe denotes the nearneſs and certainty of the event, “’Hôn xeiraz-ázzórrerol-3&axstar." See Schmid. ad 1. The firſt judicial act of Chriſt, i. e. the deſtruction of the Jews, and not the laſt judgment of the world, ſeems here predićted. * Probably, according to Macknight, the ſackcloth of penitente and mourners. I Chron. xxi. 16. * Matth. xi. I 8. * “The Romans will come and take away our place and na- “tion." John xi. 48. * been of John the Baptiſt. 2 11 been ſaid, againſt the credit of his divine miſſion, that he only borrowed and appropriated the pre- dićtions of the early prophets. But it may appear juſt, upon inſpection of the caſe, that he did not barely repeat the ſubſtance of foregoing prophecies, but really ſpoke from divine revelation, vouchſafed to himſelf. The voice of prophecy, immediately before it ceaſed in Iſrael, had denounced a day of total burning, a “great and dreadful day of the Lord';” at the ſame time intimating to the people, that univerſal converſion in heart upon the preach- ing of Elijah before that day of wrath ſhould prevent the curſe from coming to ſmite the earth. The woe here denounced had not been ful- filled, when prophecy openly revived in John. He repeated the threatening, and intimated the means of deliverance. So far Malachi and the Baptiſt agree. But the former prophet mentions the means of deliverance in figurative and gene- ral terms; on the contrary, John uſes plain lan- guage, and with great preciſion. He named his own baptiſm of repentance as the ſafeguard, which had been appointed for thoſe who would receive it. The advantage is ſtriking on the part of the Baptiſt. He declared, as Malachi and other prophets had done, that wrath impended upon Iſrael : but he added, that his baptiſm was a ſe- t Malachi iv. 5. P 2 curity 212 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony curity from it; and that, in the nature of a pri- vilege as well as an obligation, it ſet a ſign upon thoſe who received it, and placed them within that remnant, which God would ſpare. This particularity may appear ſufficient to juſtify the aſſertion of St. Luke, that “ the word of the “ Lord came unto John.” The repetition of a former predićtion with new and additional cir- cumſtances, if afterwards accompliſhed, appears a plain evidence of his prophetical character. S E CT I O N V. The Baptiſt and the Jews underſtood very dif- ferently their title, as being Abraham's chil- dren—he ſet forth the true and accepted ſon- Jhip to that patriarch—his repreſentation in that reſpect entirely original—reflection on John's baptiſmal doctrines hitherto conſidered. TO ſtrengthen that impreſſion which the offer of baptiſm might make upon his audience, the Baptiſt aſſured them, that they were entirely deſtitute of any other ſafeguard. “Think not “ to ſay within yourſelves, We have Abraham to “our father.” Deſcent from this favoured pa- triarch was the u principal ground of their confi- dence. In purſuance of the divine promiſe to " Pocock. Miſcell, pag. 172. 227—Pugio Fidei, 951. . . him. of John the Baptiſt. 213 him their great progenitor, the kingdoms of Ca- naan had really become the lot of their inherit- ance. And from this they argued with confi- dence to all thoſe promiſes, which had been made to Abraham in favour of his children. They accordingly aſſumed an excluſive intereſt in all the divine bleſfings, and expected certain immunity from all the divine judgments, during the age of the Meſſiah. But this notion of their hereditary privilege was declared by the Baptiſt to be entirely groundleſs; not indeed becauſe the purpoſe of God was changed, and the ſons of Abraham were to be diſinherited by a repeal of the promiſe; for the language of the Baptiſt implies, that the bleſſing would y really deſcend to the children of the patriarch. But, in fact, the Jewiſh conſtruction falſified the promiſe. It was given to the ſons of Abraham in one ſenſe; and the people of Iſrael, as his deſcendants, ex- pećted to inherit it in another. The real na- ture of the inheritance, and that genuine ſon- ſhip to the patriarch, which would be required in the heirs, were implied in the latitude of the promiſe; for it was originally extended to all the families of the earth. The words of it were, “ multiplying I will multiply thee ';” * They entirely overlooked the conditional and threatening turn of the promiſe. Exod. xix. 5. See Lightfoot, Vol. ii. 533, ſq-et ſup. 298. Nehem. ii. 20. Juſt. Mart. D. pag. 469. cited by Whitby. y Luke xiii. 16. xix. 9,--Lightfoot, Vol. ii. 467. * Heb. vi. 14. P 3 ſo 214 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ſo that one part of Abraham's bleſſing conſiſted in the infinite number of his children. Since the bleſſing was univerſal, that ſonſhip to Abra- ham, on which it would devolve, muſt aiſo be univerſal; and conſequently it could not be a na- tural one, as the Jews ſuppoſed. It remained therefore a queſtion, in which all families of the earth had an equal intereſt, whether they had Abraham for their father in that ſenſe which the promiſe required, or only in another a ſenſe which it excluded. And ere long, according to the warning of the Baptiſt, the juſt diſtinc- tion would be made between b the true and the reputed children of the patriarch; and when the bleſfing deſcended on the intended heirs, his natural progeny might be found to have the leaſt intereſt in it; “ for God is able of theſe ſtones to “ raiſe up children unto Abraham.” The language of the Baptiſt was evidently calculated to undeceive them in a point of the greateſt importance, which their principles miſ- repreſented ; for it implied that the promiſed bleſfing, and that ſonſhip to Abraham to which it was annexed, were both of a ſpiritual nature. He taught them, that deſcent from the patriarch in the natural e ſenſe afforded them no title to * See Whitby, Rom. ix. 8. * Between thoſe who were born of blood and of the will of man, or of the will of God. See Le Clerc and Hamm. ad l. * Rom. iv. 17. viii. 23. xi. 5. Epheſ. i. 5. I Pet. ii. 9. - the of John the Baptiſt. 215 the inheritance of his bleſfing, which was ſpiri- tual. They might be his real and legitimate deſcendants in the literal conſtrućtion, and yet in the ſpiritual meaning be no better than an adulterous generation, as our Lord afterwards called them. The words of this clauſe ſeem diſtinctly adjuſted to the divine intention, as it was afterwards explained more extenſively by Saint Paul, in conſequence of a particular q reve- lation given to him. He diſtinguiſhese, like the Baptiſt, between “the children of the fleſh” and the “children of God;” and adds, that “ the “ children of the promiſe are reckoned for the “ ſeed.” He further explains this point in another place by the caſes of Hagar and Sarah ; and repreſents the fſon of Abraham by the bondwoman as caſt out, becauſe the promiſe was not given to the children of Abraham, merely as ſuch; “Neither becauſe g they are the “ ſeed of Abraham are they all children, but in “ Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called;” that is, “They “ which are the children of the fleſh, theſe are not “ the children of God : but the children of the “ promiſe are counted for the ſeed; for this is “ the word of promiſe, at this time I will come, “ and Sarah ſhall have a ſon.” That the inheritance of Abraham's bleſfing * Epheſ. iii. 3. ſq. * Compare Rom. ix. 7, 8, ſq. f Galat. iv. 23. fºl. # Compare Rom, ix. 7. P 4 would 21 6 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony would deſcend according to the elečtion of God, and not neceſſarily in the natural line, was a principle before undiſcovered, on which the Baptiſt ſtrongly infifts, not only in a declaratory but alſo in a prophetical ſtrain. For while he in- culcated that conſtruction of the promiſe, which would lay the inheritance open to all families of the earth, he ſignified that they would in fact be admitted to it. The one point would indeed imply the other; but it is beſides enforced with an animated turn of language; “For I ſay unto “ you, that God ish able of theſe ſtones to raiſe “ up children unto Abraham.” The clauſe bears a threatening caſt; and although, like that of Malachi, “Left I come and ſmite the earth with “a curſe,” it runs conditionally, yet it relates in the ſame manner to a divine judgment impend- ing. God has raiſed up other children to the patriarch, and the pretence and boaſt of Iſrael ſtill continues, “We have Abraham to our fa- “ ther.” It may therefore be preſumed, that the divine counſel concerning the rejection of the Jews, and the adoption of the Gentiles into the kingdom of the Meſſiah, is predićted in the whole clauſe; and with as much preciſion as the ſtate of things, ſo early as the preaching of the Baptiſt, would allow. It was moſt probably * Compare Rom. xi. 23. “God is able to graft them in again." The converſions of the Jews and of the Gentiles are ſpoken of, the one by St. Paul, and the other by the Baptiſt, in expreſſions of a ſimi- lar turn. Both paſſages ſeem equally prophetical. OI16. of John the Baptiſt. 21 7 one of thoſe things, which the diſciples of Jeſus, even after all their maſter's inſtructions, remained unable to bear ; and the audience of John were far leſs likely to bear a more clear and direct de- claration of this purpoſe of God. Thus the doctrine of the Baptiſt appears partly deſigned to prepare his countrymen for the re- ception of a new diſpenſation, by combating their inveterate prejudices, and miſconceptions of the law, of the prophecies, aud of their own ſpiritual ſtate. The capital points of his doc- trine were directly levelled againſt the corrup- tions of the Scripture-ſenſe by the Jews. Diſ- carding the moral law, they reſted in ritual righteouſneſs, as a ſtate of ſalvation ; and arro- gated to themſelves the bleſfing of Abraham's children, by virtue of lineal deſcent from him ; and, in order to accommodate the kingdom of the Meſſiah to their principles, they repreſented it to be a ſtate of temporal greatneſs, and tem- poral bleſſings i. The ſyſtem of their opinions was uniform, and adjuſted in all its parts ; but when the Baptiſt declared that the kingdom of the Meſſiah, the true righteouſneſs, the promiſe itſelf, and the genuine ſonſhip to Abraham, were all ſpiritual, he overturned the whole. And ſince, in the execution of his purpoſe, he diſcloſed the ſpiritual nature and characteriſtical principles of the kingdom of heaven then ready to appear, i Matth. xx. 20. and 218 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony and denounced the impending rejećtion and ruin of Iſrael, and the adoption of other children as heirs of Abraham's bleſfing, his baptiſmal doc- trine appears not fimply admonitory, but evi- dently prophetical, and ſtrictly ſuited to prepare the way for the ſpiritual kingdom of the Meſſiah, by pointing out and removing impediments to the reception of it. The following reflection ariſes from that part of John's baptiſmal doćtrines, which we have hitherto conſidered. Many expreſſions in the Jewiſh Scriptures depreciated the Law ; and ſome implied the abolition of it. The force of all theſe was felt; and to palliate and pervert them had generally been the favourite ſtudy of the ſcribes and teachers of Iſrael. To ingenuity and learning, exerted to defend the Law, their zeal added the authority of the great Council. Accordingly, the attempt to change, and much more to ſuperſede, the Law, was marked as an inſuperable obſtacle to the admiſſion of any one, who might lay claim to a prophetical character. It prevented all queſtion reſpecting the truth of his pretenſions; and death was to be inflićted upon him, as a convicted impoſtor. Yet neither the popular conſtruction of Scripture, nor even the judicial interdićtion, had any influence with the Baptiſt. It thence appears, that he proceeded by “neceſſity laid upon him,” that is, by divine command, to aſſert and authorize that genuine ſenſe of promiſe and prophecy, which was not received of John the Baptiſt. 21 Q received in Iſrael. For the eſſential principles of the human mind, by which it reſolves and ope- rates in all conjunétures, render it incredible that he would have thus expoſed himſelf to rejećtion and death, if he knew that he was a falſe pro- phet; and it muſt have been impoſſible for him to execute his baptiſmal miniſtry, in ſuch an ori- ginal ſtrain of conſtruction and predićtion, if he had not been a true one. SECTION VI. In what terms, and to what effe&#, John ſpoke of the Meſſiah in other parts of his baptiſmal doc- trines—he aſcribes to him the attributes of power, and tranſcendent dignity, and baptizing with the Holy Ghoſt—the views which John took of theſe implied him to be an original pro- phet. THAT part of the baptiſmal doctrine of John, which has been already conſidered, conſiſted of admonition and prophecy. The firſt was applied to correót the ſpiritual miſtakes and haughtineſs of the Jews; and the laſt tended to ſhew that the kingdom of the Meſſiah was of ſuch a nature and character, as to require in thoſe, who deſired to enter therein, a ſtate of mind and principles entirely contrary to the prevalent diſpoſition of Iſrael. 220 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Iſrael. Upon the whole, the Baptiſt gave full aſſurance to his hearers, that unleſs they would return to God by the baptiſm of water, entirely diſcarding their prejudiccs and preſumption, and impreſſed with a juſt and repentant ſenſe of their ſinful and unforgiven ſtate, the bleſſings, which God had promiſed to the children of Abraham, would be inherited by others, but rejećtion and ruin would fall upon them. He diſcloſed the divine counſel to ſave them, if they would em- brace it; and at the ſame time predicted that wrath, which God had determined againſt them, if they refuſed it. And as the diſcharge of his baptiſmal office ſo far immediately tended “to “ prepare the way of the Lord,” and “ to make “ready a people” to receive him, “What ſhall “we do then º’ was a very intereſting queſtion, and ſuch as the ſubſtance of his doctrine might have been expected to ſuggeſt, not only to ſome, but to all that heard it. - But there was another, and that a more conſi- derable part of his office. He “verily baptized “ with the baptiſm of repentance; ” but not without continually “ ſaying unto the people, “ that they ſhould believe on him, which ſhould “come after ;” and as this was the principal drift of his preaching, it is repreſented by St. Mark as the ſubſtance of it; “John preached, “ ſaying, There cometh One, mightier than I, “ after me.” That it may appear how he proceeded to ex- . C1te of John the Baptiſt. 22 i cite and ſupport that faith in the Meſſiah, which he repreſented as an indiſpenſable qualification for admiſſion to his kingdom, let us now obſerve in what terms and to what effect he ſpoke of the Meſſiah, during that time, wherein he conti- nued unknown to him. For this purpoſe, let us return to the baptiſmal doctrine, as it ſtands in the text of St. Matthew, and go on with it from that clauſe, where we left it at the cloſe of the laſt ſection. What the Baptiſt had already preached, whe- ther it reſpected the religious corruptions of the Jews, or their rejećtion from the Meſſiah's king- dom, or the adoption of the Gentiles in their place, or the ſpiritual character of the approach- ing diſpenſation, and the terms of admiſſion to it, was delivered with ſuch prophetical originali- ty, and with ſo much fervency, as evidently to imply that he acted under the immediate in- fluence of the Holy Ghoſt. He next proceeds to ſpeak directly of the Meſ- ſiah, and to characterize his office, and to diſcloſe ſome of his attributes. - He firſt inculcates the ſubordinate charaćter and limited effect of his own miniſtry; “I in- “ deed baptize you with water unto repentance,” implying the great ſuperiority of the Meſſiah's baptiſm to his own. Through the whole verſe the baptiſm of water, and the weakneſs of John, ſeem to be put in contraſt with the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt, and the power of the Meſſiah, tC) 222 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony to juſtify that attribute which intervenes; “He “ that cometh after me is mightier than I.” The Meſſiah is here repreſented in that light, wherein the public exerciſe of his office would ſhortly place him; and the attribute relates not to one only of all his mighty works, as ſingly oppoſed to the baptiſm of John ; but compre- hends that general demonſtration of Power, which, according to the prophecies, and the common expectation of the Jewiſh people, would. be diſplayed in the miniſtry of the Meſſiah. It ſtands alſo in the ſtronger light, on account of the comparative form; “a mightier than I com- “eth ;” for while John preached, “The king- “dom of heaven is at hand,” he did no miracle; but on the contrary the Meſſiah ſtated, “If I by “ the finger of God caſt out devils, no doubt the “kingdom of God is come unto you.” The voice of John “crying in the wilderneſs, Prepare “ye the way of the Lord,” proclaimed the Lord's approach ; and the Baptiſt afterwards bore teſtimony to his perſon. But of the Meſ- fiah's actual preſence his own ſigns and wonders were greater witneſs than that of John. The attribute of Power was therefore ſuited to give the moſt ſignal and majeſtic repreſentation of the Meſſiah’s miniſtry. The Baptiſt proceeds, “Whoſe ſhoes I am not “worthy to bear.” St. Luke, in the parallel paſſage, explains and even exaggerates that com- parative ſelf-abaſement, which the words of John - - convey. of John the Baptiſt. 223 convey. They place in a ſtriking point of view that great humility, which diſtinguiſhed his own character; and they exalt to the higheſt degree him that was to come. Other divine meſſengers, whether of human or angelick natures, ſpeak of each other and of themſelves as brethren and fellow-ſervants: but the ſtrength of this expreſ- fion, conſidered as tending to exalt one prophet above another, is entirely ſingular in Scripture. In theſe clauſes the Baptiſt diſcloſed two very ſignal attributes of the Meſfiah, his mighty power and tranſcendent dignity. Herein indeed he de- livered nothing that contradićted the notions of his audience. They had reaſoned from the pro- phecies to a ſimilar effect; and as their expecta- tion, that the Meſſiah would be incomparable in power and greatneſs, was grounded upon the predićtions of their own Scriptures; it was not impoſſible, that the Baptiſt's knowledge of both theſe attributes might rather appear to be de- rived from antecedent prophecy, than from the revelation of the Holy Spirit to himſelf; and upon that account it might ſeem to afford no unqueſtionable evidence of his miſſion from God. But, in order to ſhew that John characterized the Meſſiah by theſe attributes, in conſequence of divine inſpiration particularly vouchſafed to himſelf, it might be obſerved, that his conſtruc- tion of thoſe prophecies which relate to the * Revel. xix, Io. xxii. 9. Meſſiah 224 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Meſfiah really vindicated them from the Jewiſh interpretation; and unfolded that genuine ſenſe of the predićtions, which was either not diſco- verca, or not received, in Iſrael. But, without enlarging upon this evidence of his prophetical character, it may perhaps here, as in a former caſe, be ſhewn from the clauſe under immediate conſideration, that both the attri- butes, which are here aſcribed to the Meſfiah by the Baptiſt, had been dićtated by divine revela- tion particularly given to him. He contraſts the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt with that of water. No conſtruction of Scrip- ture ſeems to have raiſed any expectation, that can be traced in Iſrael, of a baptiſm by water, for the purpoſe of rendering the mind of the Jew no leſs free from all the principles which he had received till then, and no leſs open to im- preſſions in all reſpects new, than if he were “ born again.” A maſter of Iſrael knew it not; and much leſs would the people apprehend and expect the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt, to com- plete what the baptiſm of water began. They believed indeed that the Holy Spirit, which had departed from Iſrael on the death of Malachi, would return in the days of the Meſ- fiah. But this expectation, however juſt, was grounded upon a general and looſe conſtruction of the prophecies, which conveyed no further information, than that the Spirit would be poured out in the latter days. But of John the Baptiſt. 225 But the turn, which the Baptiſt has given to theſe prophecies, goes farther than barely to foretell the reſtoration of the Spirit to Iſrael. He has not only ſhewn with what ſtrićtneſs the lan- guage of the prophets had been adjuſted to the divine intention ; but has even enlarged their prophecies, by the addition of ſeveral original circumſtances. - He evidently ſhews himſelf acquainted with the divine intention' to accompliſh that in the heart by the waſhing of the Holy Ghoſt, which the waſhing of water would previouſly perform for the body. Accordingly, he repreſents his ex- ternal baptiſm of water as the preparatory ſign; but the inward baptiſm of the Spirit as the per- fe&t accompliſhment. A cloſe relation and ana- logy in had been fixed between them ; and, ac- cording to the apparent import of the words of John, it would ere long be exemplified in the ap- proaching diſpenſation. When therefore he laid together the two baptiſms of water and of the Holy Ghoſt, he virtually diſcloſed that deſign of God, which had been hitherto unrevealed, to connect the waſhing of water as the ſign, with the waſhing of the Holy Ghoſt as the thing fig- nified, in a Goſpel-Sacrament; and gave a rea- fon, till then undiſcovered, for the direction | All that was internal in baptiſm was inspávoy. John iii. 12. See Whitby on Epheſ. i. 3. - * Titus iii. 5. James i. 8. Mede, Works, p. 62. Q which 226 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony which God had given to the prophets, to charac- terize the returnn of the Spirit, with his gifts and operations, by the baptiſmal element of Water. Another conſiderable addition to the prophe- cies concerning the return of the Spirit was made by the Baptiſt, when he attributed the re- ſtoration of it to the Meſſiah. For as the bap- tiſm of the Holy Ghoſt, and that of water, are here contradiſtinguiſhed, ſo alſo are the miniſters of each; and John ſtates the ſimilarity and the difference between them, and aſcribes the bap- tiſm of the Holy Ghoſt to the Meſfiah, as truly and properly as the other to himſelf. All that was external and imperfect in baptiſm he con- fines to that of water, and to himſelf the min- ifter of it; but as to what would be effectually wrought in the heart, that he attributes wholly to the baptiſm of the Spirit, and to the power of him, who would come after himſelf. He ſeems alſo to repreſent it as a mighty work, which would evidently aſcertain the tranſcendent dig- nity, as well as power", of him to whom he aſcribed it. - - * Thus, but much more expreſſively, Jeſus afterwards, under the image of living water, deſcribed the efficacy of ſpiritual grace. John iv. 14. Iſaiah xliv. 3. of which ſee the Targ. Expoſ, quoted by Whitby, John vii. 39. See alſo Wolf. ibid. Iſai. lviii. 7. et Surenhuſii Catallag, 358. 360. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. Zechar. xiv. 8. Reland. Pa- Jaeſtin. 352. Cocceius, Opp. tom. vi. in calce, Ep. 76. * John Kiv. I2. See Tillotſon, Serm. 143. . The of John the Baptiſt. 227 The Baptiſt ſeems to have made another addi- tion to the prophecies reſpecting the reſtoration of the Holy Spirit to Iſrael. For the words, “ and with fire",” ſeem to be put in contraſt with thoſe, in which John had mentioned the baptiſmal element uſed by himſelf; and upon that account they appear to carry the ſame ſpe- cial reference to the manner of accompliſhing the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt by the Meſſiah, which the water bears to the manner of admi- niſtering the inferior baptiſm of John. To confirm this ſuppoſition it may be obſerved, that the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt was actually accompliſhed by the Meſſiah, with ſuch appear- ances as the words, “ with fire,” would mani- feſtly denote. It may be further obſerved, that, on many oc- caſions, fire" had been employed as the ſenſible ſign of the divine preſence. As the God of Abra- ham manifeſted himſelf in a flaming fire, when he authorized Moſes to deliver his peculiar peo- ple from Egyptian bondage, and to bring them into covenant with Jehovah, as their king; ſo again he manifeſted himſelf by the ſame ſymbol, when he empowered the Apoſtles to reſcue the P Of the genuineneſs of theſe words, ſee Mill. ad l. et Le Clerc. Epiſt. ad Optimianum. Bibl. Select. Wolf, ad l. * Fire was the uſual ſymbol of the divine preſence. Gen. xv. 17. xxiv. 17. xl. 38. Numb. ix. 15. Deuteron. iv. 33. Jortin's Rem. on Eccl. H. vol. iii. p. 392, ſq. Jeffery's Tracts, vol. ii. p. 408. Q 2 world 228 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony world from ſpiritual bondage, and to introduce them into the kingdom of the Meſfiah. There ſeems then to be a reaſonable ground for that literal interpretation of the words, “ and “ with fire,” which many expoſitors of this paſ- ſage have adopted ; and upon that footing the Baptiſt has delivered in this clauſe an evident and original prophecy. - The ſeveral circumſtances immediately pre- ceding, when laid together, may perhaps ſeem ſufficient to ſhew, that when John aſſigned tranſ- cendent power and dignity, and the baptiſm of the Holy Ghoſt, to the Meſfiah, his doctrine in all thoſe reſpects, however conformable it might be to foregoing prophecies, was nevertheleſs the reſult of divine revelation, directly vouchſafed to himſelf. SECTION VII. In what eatent John attributed to Jeſus a judicial power—John an original prophet in applying this and the three foregoing attributes to Jeſus. THE Baptiſt, having thus attributed to the Meſſiah the adminiſtration of baptiſm with the Holy Ghoſt, repreſents him, in a ſubſequent clauſe, under another charaćter; “ whoſe fan is “in his, hand, and he will thoroughly purge his - - “ floor, of John the Baptiſt. 220 “ floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; “ but he will burn up the chaff with unquench- “ able fire.” The import of theſe expreſſions may be deter- mined by their ſenſe in former prophecies. “I will fan them with a fan,—I will deſtroy “my people,” ſaith the Lord by Jeremiah "; and again, “I will ſend unto Babylon fanners, that “ſhall fan her, and ſhall empty her land; for in “ the day of trouble they ſhall be againſt her “round about;"—and Iſrael, when under capti- vity, is called the Lord’s “threſhings,” and “the “ ſon of his floor;” and wheat and chafft are very frequently oppoſed to each other in Scrip- ture in a ſenſe ſufficiently obvious. The meaning of the clauſe, therefore, appears to be this ; he will diſcriminate, and that tho- roughly, the good corn from the unprofitable produce in his huſbandry, and will gather the one, but deſtroy the other. - The Meſſiah is here repreſented in a judicial character, as in a foregoing clauſe; but not, as it ſeems, in relation only to the ſame act of judg- ment, which the Baptiſt had already attributed to him. For this paſſage appears to contain a prediction of farther extent than the former; and although it may relate, in a primary ſenſe, to the * Jerem. xv. 7. xli. I6. li. 2. Compare Amos ix. 9. Luke xxii. 31. * Iſaiah xxi. Io. See Glaſs, Rhetor, Sac. 303, 3o4. * Pſalm i. 4. Job xxi. 18. Jerem. xx, 28. Q 3 rejection 230 On the Prophecies and Teſſimony rejećtion and ruin of Iſrael, and the admiſſion of the Gentiles in their place to the Meſſiah's king- dom; yet it may be underſtood, in an ultimate fenſe, of the univerſal ačt of his judicial power, the judgment of the laſt day. A compariſon of the expreſſions in both paſ- ſages may perhaps tend to illuſtrate and confirm this point. “Now the axe is laid unto the rootu “ of the trees; every tree, therefore, that bring- “eth not forth good fruit, is hewn down, and “caſt into the fire.” The preſent tenſe, which runs through the verſe, implies, according to the opinion of an able critics on the original text, the certainty and near approach of the vengeance denounced; and, upon comparing this prophecy with others ſtrićtly parallely in the Old Teſta- ment, it may ſeem moſt probable, that the ruin of the Jewiſh ſtate and people is alone predićted in it. - But the clauſe, which is now more immedi- ately before us, has a different tenor. Où to arriſov ây Tà zag airs, is the language, leaving uncertainty to take place as to the verb; and if it be ſupplied in the ſame tenſe, which runs through the reſt of the verſe, it muſt be rendered, “whoſe fan “will be in his hand, and he will thoroughly “ purge his floor, and will gather his wheat into * Deus minatur—foederis ſui derelićtionem, quod eſt velut arbo- rem radicitus exſcindere. Grot. ad l. * Schmid. ad l. X Iſaiah x. 33, 34. Micah iii. 12. “ the of John the Baptiſt. 231 “ the garner, but will burn up the chaff with “ unquenchable fire.” If this be allowed, our view will not be con- fined ſo immediately, as it was in the former clauſe, to one and that an imminent act of the Meſſiah's judicial power; but may be carried forward to another” and a more remote exerciſe of it. If to this it be added, that he ſhall purge his floor “thoroughly,” diaza Sagići, and not in a li- mited manner, the act intended may ſeem not national only, but univerſal; and ſince the fire of his vengeance is called “ unquenchable,” the judgment, to which the clauſe relates, may ap- pear final and irreverſible. On theſe accounts, then, the paſſage may be imagined to carry a farther view than barely to the deſtruction of the holy city, and the rejection of the Jews; both of which inflićtions, as the prophecies of Jeſus and St. Paul ſeem to intimate, will be removed, when the times of the Gentiles ſhall have been fulfilled. - Upon the whole, the clauſe under immediate conſideration apparently ſurpaſſes the former, and may ſeem to contain a more enlarged prediction. The foregoing prophecy reſpected the ruin of Iſrael ſolely; the latter has poſſibly the ſame re- * Poſteriora hujus commatis verba, de colligendis frugibus et com- burendis paleis, ad ultimi judicii diem pertinent, ut apparet ex colla- tione verborum Chriſti infra, xiii. 3o. 49. Grot, ad Î. Q 4 lation 232 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony lation in a primary meaning, but at the ſame time probably extends, in an ultimate ſenſe, to the Meſfiah's judgment of all the world. And perhaps the prophecy, which Jeſus himſelf after- wards delivered, of his approaching vengeance upon Iſrael, had the ſame reſpect to his real and perſonal coming to inflićt final puniſhment upon all his enemies. There is alſo another material difference be- tween the two paſſages. The Baptiſt had before declared, that vengeance impended upon Iſrael; he now not only denounces it to all the adverſa- aries of the Meſſiah, but alſo repreſents it as in- flićted by him; to him, as Lord of the harveſt, the fan and the floor are aſcribed; he will gather, and he will burn. Thus alſo the writer to the Hebrews aſcribes to the Meſſiah, as his proper and perſonal prero- gative, an infallible and irreverſible judgment, and the inflićtion of vengeance. For he had, as a ſon, the adminiſtration of all things over his own houſe, and, in conſequence of his right of diſpoſal, had promiſed a reſt to the faithful; but to them, who grieved him with their unbelief, he ſaid in his wrath, “They ſhall not enter into “my reſt.” In this chapter to the Hebrews, and in the clauſes of the baptiſmal doctrine now un- der conſideration, admiſſion to the kingdom of God, and excluſion from it, are repreſented as dependent upon the Meſſiah", as Judge of all. * Heb. iii. 8. 19. - - Here of John the Baptiſt. 233 Here St. Matthew finiſhes the account of the baptiſmal doćtrine of John, before the coming of Jeſus to Jordan. St. Luke adds, “And many “other things, in his exhortation, preached he “ unto the people.” But if the former Evan- geliſt had not already given the ſubſtance of them, St. Luke probably would have extended the account. It may therefore be preſumed, that what has been already conſidered forms a juſt compendium of ſuch parts of the baptiſmal doc- trine, as had been delivered in that interval, however the Baptiſt might enlarge and illuſtrate it, upon the frequent calls he had to repeat it. He has diſplayed the character of the Meſſiah by four capital attributes; by his mighty power; by his tranſcendent dignity; by his baptiſm with the Holy Ghoſt, as a Prieſt; and by his judicial authority, as a King, to be exerciſed ere long over Iſrael, and finally over the whole world. And, from the amount of the baptiſmal doćtrines hi- therto conſidered, it appears, that his knowledge of the nature and purpoſe of the Goſpel, and of the attributes and offices of the Meſſiah, far ex- ceeded that of the Apoſtles, till the ſame divine Spirit, which inſtrućted and guided the Baptiſt, had alſo ſhed his influence upon them. 2 SECTION 234 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony SECTION VIII. That the preceding charaćiers were attributed to the Meſſiah by the Baptiſt before Jeſus pre- ſented himſelf for Baptiſm at Jordan—the words of the Baptiſt, “I knew him not,” con- ſidered. AFTER having illuſtrated ſo far the prophetical teſtimony of John to the Meſſiah, I proceed to ſhew, that it was delivered while he remained unknown to the Baptiſt. Before John had attained that age, which the Law” appointed for entering upon a prieſtly funètion, it may be reaſonably preſumed, that he did not receive a command to baptize, and knew not the ſubſtance of thoſe doćtrines, which he afterwards delivered. “He was in the wilder- “neſs till the day of his ſhewing unto Iſrael;” there it was, that the word of the Lord came unto him; and, in purſuance of that divine miſ- fion, he began to exerciſe his office there", whilſt Jeſus continued at Nazareth d in Galilee. After the Baptiſt had preached in the hill- country of the wilderneſs of Judaea, near to He- bron, the ſuppoſed place of his nativity and edu- * Numb. iv. 3. 1 Chron. xxiii. 3. * “What went ye out into the wilderneſs to ſee " Luke vii. 24. * Matth. ii. 23. compared with iii. 1. cation, g of John the Baptiſt. 235 cation, he came into the region about Jordane, where the people of Jeruſalem and all Judaeaf went out to him, and were baptized. Faith in the Meſſiah, then ſpeedily coming to his kingdom, was the capital article of his bap- tiſmal exhortations g; and it has been already ſhewn, by what doćtrines he endeavoured to re- move impediments to the reception of him, and by what characters and attributes he deſcribed him. As theſe attributes ſeem to be all which John aſſigned to the Meſfiah before he had bap- tized him, perhaps it may be allowable to infer, that no other had been as yet revealed to the Baptiſt. He was called and commiſſioned to ma- nifeſt the Meſſiah unto Iſrael; and, with a view to the accompliſhment of this office, he was in- ſtructed to repreſent him as inveſted with mighty power, and as far ſuperior to himſelf in dignity, and to aſcribe to him the prerogatives of bap- tizing with the Holy Ghoſt, and of immediately exerciſing judgment upon Iſrael, and finally upon the whole world ; and he had been informed, that he, upon whom he ſhould ſee the Spirit de- ſcend and remain, was the perſon, that ſhould baptize with the Holy Ghoſt. Theſe attributes of the Meſſiah, and, as it ſeems, theſe alone, having been revealed to John, either by the word of the Lord at his miſſion, or by the Holy Ghoſt ſince his original call, he bap- * Like iii. 4. f Matth. iii. 5, # Mark i. 7. tized 236 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony tized in the wide and populous diſtrićt above- mentioned, from the time of his firſt receiving the divine commiſſion, till the Meſfiah met him at the river Jordan. This neceſſarily muſt have been a period of conſiderable length; and ac- cording to the Goſpel-writers it was an interval of ſix months. The baptiſmal doctrines, which the Baptiſt delivered during the whole of this period, ſeem to afford no evidences, that he had received any more extenſive and particular in- formation from heaven concerning the Meſſiah or his offices, than what the above abſtract con- tains. From appearances, therefore, it may be pre- ſumed, that divine revelation had not as yet ac- quainted him, who was the Meſſiah ; and as this preſumption ſeems to be confirmed by his ex- preſs aſſertion, “I knew him not,” let us endea- vour to fix the ſenſe of it, and the time to which it muſt be reſtrained. If the Baptiſt be ſuppoſed to diſclaim a know- ledge of the Meſfiah's perſon, then the expreſſion of the Evangeliſth, “He was in the deſerts till “ the day of his ſhewing unto Iſrael,” muſt be taken ſtrićtly, as over-ruling any ſuppoſition, that the Baptiſt viſited Jeruſalem at feſtival-ſeaſons, according to the direction of the Law, with which Jeſus complied. And it ſeems extremely probable that John did not conform to this Legal * Luke i. 86. - injunction, of John the Baptiſt. 237 injunction, and that the Evangeliſt really in- tended to obviate any belief that he obeyed it. For it may be obſerved, that John was ſet apart for the baptiſmal office, and filled with the Holy Ghoſt, from his mother's womb. He might therefore all along be guided to hold himſelf in- dependent of Legal obligations. This would not be without precedent in the Čaſe of Elias, in “ the ſpirit and power” of whom the Baptiſt came. While the Law confined the ſacrificial acts of religion to the Temple and the Temple- miniſters, Elijah held a public ſacrifice on the top of Carmeli. And as the type is always in- ferior to the antitype, and as John was conti- nually filled with the Spirit, the ſame divine di- rection, under which Elijah had acted, might have diſcharged the Baptiſt alſo from the reſtric- tion of the Law. The diligence and nicety of the Evangeliſts in their relation of particulars appear of great weight in this queſtion. Their account is this: that the callk of John happened “ in the wilderneſs;” that he preached there firſt, and then came and baptized “ in all the re- “gion round about Jordan ;” and that after ſix months Jeſus came from Nazareth in Galilee be- yond Jeruſalem and Samaria', and met the Bap- * I Kings xviii. 19. * Lightfoot, vol. ii. p. 755. | Samaria lay between ; and the journey from Galilee that way to Jeruſalem would take up three days. Joſeph. in vit, et Antiq, lib. ii. cap. 5. See Lightfoot, Harmony, Part III, p. 625. tiſt 238 On the Prophecies and Tºſlimony tiſt at Jordan. As this accurate detail of the gradual circumſtances ſeems the natural reſult of an intention ºn to repreſent Jeſus and John as perſonally unknown to each other, the afler- tion of the Baptiſt, “I knew him not,” may reaſonably be underſtood to imply that he knew not even the perſon of Jeſus. But it may alſo be taken in a ſenſe equivalent to that of a ſimilar expreſſion of Jeſus concerning John, “they knew him not,” which relates not to the perſon, but to the divine charaćter of the Bap- tiſt. In perſon, as the Baptiſt, John was clearly known ; but he was not received as that Elias, “ which was for to come.” In the ſame ſenſe John might profeſs, he knew not that Jeſus was the Meſfiah ; and this conſtruction of his words may perhaps be confirmed by the following con- ſiderations. One great article of his preaching, before the Meſfiah appeared, was this; “There cometh “one mightier than I.” He was ſufficiently qua- lified for delivering ſuch a notice, if he had been aſſured on divine authority that the mighty one would ſpeedily appear; and ſuppoſing him to have known who it was that ſhould bear this great character, the intelligence was apparently of no preſent uſe, as this ſtage of his office did not require it. He was qualified both as a pro- phet and as the forerunner of the Meſſiah, with- * Compare Luke ii. 51. Matth. xiii. 55. Mark vi. 33. Out of John the Baptiſt. - 239 out it; and God uſually reveals all that is neceſ. ſary, but nothing premature or ſuperfluous. As therefore no evidences have occurred in any parts of the baptiſmal doctrine, which have been hitherto conſidered, that John really knew Jeſus to be the Meſſiah, it ſeems a reaſonable infer- ence, that ſome few of the Meſſiah's attributes had been revealed to the Baptiſt, but that no determinate indication had been given, that Je- ſus was the mighty one, whoſe coming he had predicted. When the abſolute appearance of the Meſ: ſiah required that he ſhould be manifeſted to Iſrael in the fulleſt latitude, then indeed it would become indiſpenſably neceſſary that the Baptiſt ſhould know him in his divine character; but it was not immediately requiſite, before the oppor- tunity arrived of ſhewing him perſonally to the people. Upon this footing then, the whole of that knowledge which had been imparted to John, either at his call or ſince, was ſtrictly ad- juſted to the nature of his office, as Forerunner; and extended no further than to qualify him for that part of his miniſtry, which has been hitherto conſidered. - As to the time, to which the words of the Baptiſt, “I knew him not,” extend, we may obſerve that, if they are taken in the firſt of the two ſenſes above-mentioned, the expreſſion com- prehends nearly the whole of his life; but if they are underſtood in the latter ſenſe, then it will appear 240 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony &c. appear that the period, to which they relate, commenced with his call to the baptiſmal min- iſtry; but it will be clear in either caſe, that it expired upon the coming of Jeſus to his baptiſm, And perhaps the greateſt ſtrength of the aſſertion may lie in this latter ſenſe, and in this reference of it to that period of time, during which he was exerciſing thus far his baptiſmal miniſtry. The caſe then appears to ſtand thus; it may be preſumed that John could not know the Meſ- ſiah without a divine revelation ; and the ſub- ſtance of his baptiſmal doctrine, as the Evange- liſts deliver it, during his miniſtry of half a year, gives no evidence that he knew the Meſfiah dur- ing that period; and conſequently, it ſeems to be credible that he applied the aſſertion, “I knew “ him not,” in that ſenſe, and to that interval of time. Upon the whole, there appears a ſufficient reaſon to imagine, that the Baptiſt intended to aſſert, that he knew not either the perſon of Jeſus, or who was the Meſfiah, before they met at the river Jordan ; ſo that, in fact, he had pre- dićted the immediate coming of the Meſfiah, and had diſcloſed ſome of his attributes, by vir- tue of one revelation ; but at the ſame time was left unable to know him, whenever he ſhould ap- pear, without another. O N T H E PRO PHE CIES AND TESTIMONY O F JOHN THE BAPTIST, A N D T H E PARALLEL PROPHECIES O F JESUS CHRIST. PART II. SECTION I. IT has been already ſhewn that all the cha- raēters of the Meſſiah, which have been hitherto conſidered, were aſcribed to him before the coming of Jeſus to Jordan; and that the Baptiſt ſeems to have diſclaimed any knowledge of him previous to that interview, either as to his per- ſon or his office. And his aſſertion, “I knew “ him not,” has been applied in the laſt of theſe two ſenſes to all that period of his baptiſmal miniſtry, in which he continued ſtrictly the Forerunner. For the Baptiſt, conſidered only as R. the 242 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony the prophet of the Higheſt, might have been ſufficiently qualified to prepare his way, without knowing him either as to his perſon or his divine character, that is, without knowing Jeſus of Nazareth, as ſuch, or that He was the Meſ- ſiah. But there is another light, in which the laſt only of the Evangeliſts ſeems to have repreſented the Baptiſt. He “came for a witneſs,” as well as a prophet; and it appears requiſite to diſtin- guiſh and ſeparate theſe charaćters, ſince the aſ- fertion, “I knew him not,” cannot extend to them equally, and be applied with the ſame propriety to the one, as to the other; and this will appear more fully as we proceed. As we are now to conſider the teſtimony of John, immediately ſubſequent to that interview, wherein the Meſſiah became known to him ; and as that teſtimony was grounded principally upon the baptiſm of Jeſus; it will be proper to begin with a view of that important tranſac- tion. “Jeſus came from Nazareth of Galilee to Jor- “ dan unto John, to be baptized of him; but “John forbad him a.” *. As the Meſſiah now ačtually appeared, he not only aſcertained the divine miſſion of John, as his Forerunner, by thus fulfilling the princi- pal prophecy which John had delivered ; but he * Matth. iii, 13. and Mark i. 9. alſo of John the Baptiſt. 243 alſo opened to the Baptiſt a new and diſtinét part of his office. Upon this interview. John ceaſed to be ſimply the Forerunner; and it be- came incumbent upon him in future to bear Teſtimony that the mighty one, whoſe way he had prepared, and whoſe immediate coming he had predicted, was really come, and had mani- feſted himſelf openly. If therefore it be conſidered, that the circum- ſtances and office of John were thus altered by the appearance of the Meſſiah at Jordan, the caſe may poſſibly ſeem to require that his aſſer- tion, “I knew him not,” ſhould be extended as far as this interview, but not beyond it. For although the perſon of the Meſſiah had not been revealed to the Baptiſt before this meeting, as the tenor of his baptiſmal doctrine, and his di- rect aſſertion, if it has been rightly interpreted, ſeem to imply ; yet, from his condućt during this interview it may be juſtly concluded, that the Meſſiah was made known to him then by immediate revelation. Inſtances occur in Scripture, which cloſely reſemble the preſent caſe. “b The Lord had “ told Samuel in his ear, To-morrow I will ſend “ thee a man ; and thou ſhalt anoint him to be “ captain over my people Iſrael, that he may “ ſave my people out of the hand of the Phi- “ liſtines. And when Samuel ſaw Saul, the * I Sam. ix, 15. R 2 “ Lord 244 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “Lord ſaid unto him, Behold the man whom I “ told thee of ; this ſame ſhall reign over my “ people.” c The ſame prophet received another commiſ- ſion reſpecting the ſucceſſor of Saul. The Lord ſaid unto him ; “I will ſend thee to Jeſſe the “Bethlehemite, for I have provided me a king “among his ſons. Call Jeffe to the ſacrifice, “ and I will ſhew thee what thou ſhalt do ; and “ thou ſhalt anoint unto me him whom I name “ unto thee.” When David appeared, “ the “ Lord ſaid, Ariſe, anoint him, for this is he.” Theſe paſſages are here produced at length, that the parallel between the caſe of Samuel, and that of John, may ſtand in the ſtrongeſt light. Samuel, on both thoſe occaſions, received a commiſſion to anoint the future king; yet then, and in the whole of the interval which preceded his unction of the king, Samuel knew him not; but when the king ſtood before him, the prophet inſtantly knew him by another revelation ; and the caſe appears to be the ſame with the Baptiſt in both reſpects. That John now knew the divine charaćter of * I Sam. xvi. I I, 12. In the laſt of theſe two inſtances, the pro- phet called all the ſons of Jeffe to the ſacrifice, not knowing which of them the Lord had choſen—after Eliab, the reſt of them paſſed ſucceſſively before Samuel, and he ſaid unto Jeſſe, “ The Lord hath “ not choſen theſe.” Revelation gave no direction reſpecting any of theſe : but when the youngeſt of all came in, the Lord ſaid im- mediately, “This is he.” Jeſus, of John the Baptiſt. 245 Jeſus, ſeems to be aſcertained by his conduct upon this occaſion, as it marks, in the moſt lively and affecting colours, his deep veneration of the in- comparable perſon then before him. Jeſus came to be baptized : “ but John forbad him ;” in the language of humility and awe, not of au- thoritative refuſal. His own ſpiritual neceſ- fities, as they lay deep in his mind, were inſtantly avowed in his expreſſion, “I have need to be “ baptized of thee.” He thus made that very profeſſion of faith in him who would baptize with the Holy Ghoſt, which his own baptiſmal doctrine had conſtantly enforced upon others. Like them he needed the baptiſm of the Spirit; and he felt his great unworthineſs to baptize his and their Mighty Superior; “Comeſt thou to me?” His heſitation incurred not the ſlighteſt rebuke ; it turned entirely upon the ſenſe of his own ex- treme inferiority. The great perſon then before him ſaw its principle, and overruled it in the gentleſt manner; “Suffer it to be ſo now, for “ thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteouſ- “neſs e.” From the turn of this paſſage it ſeems, that Jeſus ſpake with a particular view to the circumſtances of himſelf and the Baptiſt at the time, with reſpect to their ſeveral offices: as if * Plato, cited by Schultetus, Exercit. Evang. ad l. Arºorooºn tº ra. Hovrä Trpººlsw, % º zoxv7recºyºoveſv. Juſtitia eſt, facere gi/ce ſui ſunt muneris, et non curioſum eſſe in negotiis alienis. AEquum igitur Chriſtus judicat, at Johannes juſtitiam ſuam, ipſe ſuam, impleat; hoc eſt, ut demandato ſibi munere utergue defungatur, R 3 he 246 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony he had ſaid more at large, that his hour of bap- tizing with the Holy Ghoſt, to which John had alluded, was not yet arrived; although that, with every other mighty work aſſigned to him, would be accompliſhed in the appointed ſeaſon; but that in the mean while his miniſtry was to begin here, and in this manner. “Then he ſuf- “fered him.” From this intereſting conference it may be poſſible to define, with greater preciſion than before, the ſubſtance and extent of that divine revelation, reſpecting the Meſſiah, which had been hitherto vouchſafed to John. For thence it appears, firſt, that the Baptiſt had not been as yet acquainted, at what time and upon what oc- caſion he ſhould ſee the Spirit of God deſcend upon the Meſſiah; or even that he ſhould actu- ally receive the baptiſm of water. If John had been appriſed, that on the baptiſm of the Meſ- ſiah the Spirit would viſibly deſcend upon him, or even that it was in the divine intention that the Meſfiah ſhould be baptized by him ; all heſi- tation on his part, from whatever principle of comparative ſelf-abaſement it might ariſe, would have been antecedently overruled. He would moſt probably have haſted to the accompliſhment of his office in this point, as it would authenti- cate the divine miſſion of Jeſus and his own, rather than have delayed it by the ſmalleſt re- luctance. As this then appears a new example, that di- vine of John the Baptiſt. 247 vine revelation had not hitherto fully informed the Baptiſt in all points which reſpected the Meſſiah, and even his own miniſtry; it may help to confirm the inference before made, that the particular perſon f of the Meſſiah had not been revealed to John at his original miſſion. But it is more material to obſerve from this tranſaction, that Jeſus evidently dićtated to John the counſel of God concerning his own baptiſm. The Holy Ghoſt, with which the Baptiſt had been filled from the womb, appears here to have given him no direction. The words of Jeſus were left to ſupply the place of the Spirit's in- fluence; and the authority and inſpiration of Jeſus, even before he was anointed with the Spirit, were in fact atteſted by John, when he obeyed his requiſition, in a caſe, wherein re- velation from God had not previouſly inſtructed him, and wherein alſo his own mind had ſug- geſted an oppoſite conduct. * Since then, according to the foregoing circum- ſtances, the Baptiſt apparently knew that the Meſſiah then ſtood before him, he could not, it may be preſumed, baptize him as a diſciple. For in whatever points the baptiſm of water was ac- commodated to the converts of John, in all of them it was evidently unſuitable to the Meſſiah. Jeſus therefore muſt have received it upon ſome other principle; and the Scripture ſeems to indi- f See the cloſe of the laſt Sečtion, R 4 Cate 248 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony cate that he was publicly conſecrated" to the prieſthood of the Goſpel by baptiſm, as the prieſtsh of the Law were uſhered into their min- iſtry by the waſhing of water. He became ſub- jećt to the Law for man ; and in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be, not only a merciful, but alſo a faithful high prieſt in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the fins of the people. To proceed:—This inaugural ceremony was ſcarcely concluded, when the heavens were opened, and the Spirit of God deſcended in a bodily ſhape, and in the fight of John and of the ſurrounding multitude reſted k upon Jeſus. He was thus “anointed with the Holy Ghoſt, and “ with power ;” and through the whole of his miniſtry upon earth, his miracles were wrought, his doćtrines and prophecies were delivered, by virtue of that Spirit, which at this time deſcended and remained upon him. The voice of the Fa- ther immediately followed; “This m is my be- g According to prophecy; Pſalm xlv. 7. Iſai. lxi. 1. * Exod. xxix. 4. 7. Levit. viii. 6. See Lightfoot, vol. ii. 476. i Hebr. ii. 17. * Iſaiah xi. 2.—Abarbanel on this place obſerves, that the reſting of the Spirit upon the Meſſiah was one of his prerogatives. * A &ts x. 38.—The ſubſtance of that commiſfion, which this unétion gave him, is recited by himſelf, in the words of Iſaiah, Luke iv. 18, 19. * Mark i. II. Luke iii. 22, &c.—Quod alius dicit, in quo mihi complacui , alius, in te complacui; alius, in te complacuit mihi; ſi quaeris quid horum in illa voce ſonuerit, quodlibet accipe, dummodo intelligas of John the Baptiſt. 240 “loved Son, in whom I am well pleaſed.” In fact, this was the baptiſmal form of the Meſſiah; for by the title of his beloved Son, the Father glorified n Jeſus to be an High-Prieſt, and at the ſame time declared the ſufficiency and ſucceſs of his ſacerdotal miniſtry; “ In thee I am well “ pleaſed o.” The doctrine of the Apoſtles fully illuſtrates this laſt expreſſion. According to them, the ſource of human ſalvation and of all ſpiritual bleſſings is stºozia Geg, the good pleaſure of God. The Redeemer himſelf therefore pro- feſſes to the Father; “ In burnt-offerings and “ſacrifices for ſin thou haſt had no pleaſure; lo, intelligas eos, quinon eandem locutionem retulerunt, eandem retuliſle ſententiam. Auguſt. lib. ii. de Conſ. Evang. c. 14. * Compare 2 Pet. i. 17. ſq. where the Voice of the Father is urged as a powerful teſtimony to Jeſus ; and to this Voice he himſelf pro- bably refers, John v. 37. See Macknight on Har. §. 142. Tºv A3, ov wºrã 32 ºre psyoëvro in ºpiº, that is, Ye have not retained in your minds his word, when he bore witneſs of me, from heaven. Compare Heb. ii. I. ºrpoaizey roſ, doecºsia, is equivalent to Aéyovéxeir ºrgyro, and zoºpa;#veſ, to the contrary. o See Budaeus, Comm. Ling. Gr. 3 16. Schmid. ad l. Chemnitius - thinks, that St. Paul alludes to this Voice of the Father, Coloſſ. i. 19. Of the original word, which the Seventy render by stºozio, frequent uſe is made, when God is ſaid to receive a ſacrifice favourably, or not. Levit. xix. 7. xxii. 23. 27. Pſalm li. 19. Iſaiah liii. Io. “The plea- “ ſure of the Lord ſhall proſper in his hand.” The Chald. Par. on this chapter ſays, that it was the good pleaſure of the Lord to forgive all fins for his (the Meſfiah's) ſake; that ſo they might ſee the king- dom of the Meſfiah. Braun. ad Hebr. p. 627, et Sele&ta Sacr. pag. 358. Hence the Meſfiah's miniſtry is called the “ acceptable year” of the Lord; and the Lord is ſaid to have, or not to have, “pleaſure” in ſacrifice. Epheſ. i. 5. Heb. x, 6. “I come, 250 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “I come to do thy will, O God;” and by this will we are ſanctified through the offering of that body, which God had prepared for the Meſfiah ; and the Father hath made us accepted in the Beloved. He pleaſed the Father; and thereby prevailed with him in behalf of men, becauſe he was the Son of God ; and to this conſtruction the order of the words in the whole paſſage, as it was pronounced by the Father, appears imme- diately to lead; but the contrary opinion, that, becauſe he had pleaſed the Father, he became the Son of God, reverſes the tenor, and ſeems to deſtroy the force, of the ſentence. SECTION II. The Baptiſt now pointed out the Meſſiah—aſcrib- ed Preexiſtence to him—the meſſage of the Council to the Baptiſt conſidered. IMMEDIATELY °, that is, probably, before ſufficient time had been given to the Baptiſt for pointing out Jeſus, as the Meſſiah, to the people, the Spirit led him up into the wilderneſs, to undergo the temptation. But as John was now enabled to enlarge his baptiſmal doctrine very conſiderably, in conſequence of the Meſfiah's aćtual appearance, he accordingly referred to it P Mark i. 12, II] of John the Baptiſt. 251 in his firſt teſtimony, ſubſequent to the baptiſm of Jeſus. He declared to the multitude, who either had been ačtually preſent at this miracu- lous tranſačtion, or at leaſt had been made ac- quainted with it; “This" was he, of whom I “ ſpake; He that cometh after me is preferred “ before me, for he was before me.” This de- ſignation of the Meſſiah is nearly although not abſolutely perſonal; and the Baptiſt apparently ſpeaks of one who had been lately preſent, and to perſons who then had ſeen him. The attribute, which is contained in the words, “he was before me,” is a new ground of dig- nity; and it ſurpaſſes any charaćter of the Meſ- ſiah, which John had mentioned before the baptiſm of Jeſus. This ſeems therefore another example, that the charaćter of the Meſſiah was only gradually unfolded to the Baptiſt. It likewiſe appears from hence, that the Holy Ghoſt, which had notified the perſon of the Meſ- ſiah to John, ſuggeſted alſo this eminent attribute of his preexiſtence, when that occaſion was come which immediately required the application of it. For Jeſus had received the baptiſm of John, which appeared, even to the Baptiſt, incompati- ble with the preeminence of the Meſſiah, and he had made as yet no diſplay of that extraordinary power, which John had prophetically attributed to him. Theſe circumſtances might rather tend 9 John i. 15. to 252 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony to weaken the effect of the previous declaration of the Baptiſt, that he, who would come after him, was unſpeakably his ſuperior in power and dignity. The attribute, therefore, of the Meſ- ſiah's preexiſtence ſeems to have been dićtated by the Spirit, and to have been aſſerted by the Baptiſt, in order to exalt the charaćter of the Meſſiah, and place it upon a new and ſtronger ground, at that time, and under thoſe particular circumſtances, when it was moſt immediately re- quired. This attribute appears to have been grounded upon that interpretation of the title, Son of God, which the Holy Spirit, the continual guide and inſtructor of the Baptiſt, had ſuggeſted to him upon this occaſion ; and, indeed, he ſeems to have been led by the ſame divine influence to ground upon that title other characters of the Meſſiah, which will be conſidered in their place. But to proceed:—During the temptation of the Meſſiah, the Jewiſh Council, by a deputation of Prieſts and Levites to John, enquired into the divine character, which he aſſumed. It was the prerogative' of that Council to examine and de- cide upon every claim of this kind; and the an- ſwer of the Baptiſt to this judicial meſſage was intended to conſtitute that evidence, upon which the Council virtually profeſſed to admit or diſal- low his divine miſſion. This ſeems to be im- * This is implied in Luke xiii. 33. See Lightfoot, Harmony, Part II. 521. & plied of John the Baptiſt. 253 plied in the language of the meſſengers; “Who “ art thou ? that we may give an anſwer to them “ that ſent us.” It may therefore be expected, that the anſwer of the Baptiſt, upon this occa- ſion, ſhould produce the true evidence of his pro- phetical character. His reply accordingly did aſſign it. After therein explaining the nature and limiting the extent of his office, he atteſted, as he had done moſt probably during the laſt forty days, that the Meſſiah had really appeared, and would ſpeedily manifeſt himſelf openly in his preeminent miniſtry; “There ſtandeth's one “among you, whom ye know not; he it is, who “ coming after me is preferred before me.” By this anſwer he virtually gave teſtimony to the Council itſelf, that the Meſſiah was abſolutely come, and by his actual appearance in Iſrael had fulfilled that prophecy of his approach, which, as they knew, John conſtantly had delivered, during that period in which he had baptized the people of Jeruſalem, and all Judaea, and the re- gion round about Jordan. So that in fact he urged the accompliſhment of his capital prophe- cy, as Forerunner, in proof of his miſſion from God; and it was formerly obſerved, that this was the intended and ſufficient evidence of it. Beſides, “ theſe things were done in Betha- “bara, where John was baptizing",” and there- t 22 * John i. 26. Wolf, ad l. “Standeth, i. e. miniſtereth." Compare Zech. iii. 7. Grot. ad Joh. iii. 29. * John i. 28, fore 254 On the Prophecies and Tºftimony fore moſt probably in the hearing of ſome diſci- ples, who had ſeen Jeſus receive baptiſm, and had heard their maſter almoſt immediately teſti- fy, “This was he;” and who were conſequently enabled to corroborate what the Baptiſt affirmed in his anſwer to the Levites. The information then, which the meſſengers had an opportunity of collecting at Bethabara, was clear and deci- five, as it certified this capital circumſtance; that John really bore a divine commiſſion, ſince his predićtion of the immediate approach of the Meſſiah had been fulfilled ; foraſmuch as the Meſſiah himſelf, upon receiving baptiſm from John, had been openly atteſted in a miraculous manner from heaven. Thus, that the viſit of the Levites to John happened after he had bap- tized Jeſus, was a circumſtance of conſiderable advantage in the queſtion concerning the pro- phetical character of the Baptiſt, which had been the cauſe of their coming ; for the firſt certain and unqueſtionable evidence of the divine miſ- ſion of John aroſe at the baptiſm of Jeſus; and the Baptiſt's anſwer to the meſſengers accordingly affigned it. The providence of God had, as it ſeems, ſo ordered events and circumſtances, that when the claim of the Baptiſt to an inſpired cha- racter came under the examination of that judi- cial authority, which preſcribed to the people in allowing or rejećting it, he had been already enabled to aſſign the completion of his prophecy, as Forerunner, for a plain credential of his divine COIIl- of John the Baptiſt. 25 j commiſſion ; which he could not have done at any period of his miniſtry prior to the baptiſm of Jeſus. And ſince the Council did not con- demn him for a falſe prophet, they ought in obe- dience to the Law, and upon their own princi- ples, to have received his teſtimony as a true O]]C. S E C T I O N III. The Baptiſt now pointing out the Meſſiah aſcrib- ed to him the title of “Lamb of God”—il- luſtration of that and further teſtimonies then given by the Baptiſt—the meaning of the aſ: ſertion, “I ſºmew him not,” further explained. ON the next day, as it appears", after the viſit of the Levites, Jeſus returned from the temptation, and preſented himſelf again to John. This firſt opportunity of executing his office in the utmoſt extent was immediately embraced by the Bap- tiſt, and he applied to Jeſus this ſignal and inte- reſting attribute; “Behold, the Lamb of God!” This indication of the Meſſiah is perſonal; and, as ſuch, John immediately purſues it; “This is “ he, of whom I ſaid, After me cometh a man, “ which is preferred before me.” * See John i. 29. When 256 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony When he thus ſtiled Jeſus perſonally, “Lamb “ of God,” he ſeems to have reſpected his ſacri- fice for ſin, as the remainder of the clauſe im- plies, “who taketh away the fins of the world.” Indeed, all the piacular oblations of the Law, whether made day by day continually or only at ſtated times, had their conſummation in him, as their antitype. That the paſchal º Lamb in particular was a type of the Meſſiah, appears evident from the Scriptural application of the pro- phecy, “A bone of him ſhall not be broken y;” and the paſſover, in the Jewiſh ſenſe, denoted re- demption. But the Meſſiah cannot be con- ſidered as a juſt antitype either to the Lamb of the daily ſacrifice, or to that of the paſſover, unleſs his death had an expiatory purpoſe and effect. Accordingly, the Apoſtles repreſent him as ſacrificed for us, as a Lamb without ſpot, and as our paſſover. He has obtained the redemp- tion of man, not merely becauſe he was ſpotleſs, but alſo becauſe he was ſlain ; partly by his un- blemiſhed righteouſneſs, but much more by his precious blood. So that by the full import of the attribute, Lamb of God, the Baptiſt in fact * The Baptiſt alludes, either to the Lamb of the daily ſacrifice, (Lightfoot's Harmony, Part II. 529.) or to the Paſchal Lamb : Bochart, Hieroz. Par. I. lib. ii. c. 50. See Huet. D. E. 729.—Dey- ling. Obſ. Sacr. p. 254. Par. III.—Epiphan. Haereſ. 8. Friſchmuth. Diff. de Agno Paſchali.-1 Pet. i. 19. Rom. iii. 25. v. 9. Heb. ix. I4. X. I9. Apoc. v. 9. vii. 14. y Pſalm xxxiv. 20. John xix. 36. oppoſed of John the Baptiſt. 257 oppoſed Jeſus to all the Levitical offerings, and pointed him out as the great ſacrifice which God had ordained, and would accept, for Univerſal ex- piation of ſin. It may be further obſerved from this attribute, that the character of the Meſſiah ſeems now to have been revealed to John more extenſively than before. For the Baptiſt had prophetically re- preſented him as the objećt of faith ; and had given teſtimony that the Father from heaven had declared himſelf “well pleaſed” in him, as his beloved Son ; but he had not hitherto aſ- ſigned, either the principal ground of that faith, or the reaſon of that good pleaſure. But now, John at once enlarged his former predićtion, and carried it to far greater extent; and alſo il- Tuſtrated fully the force and import of the voice from heaven, by now aſcribing remiſſion of ſins, in purſuance of the good pleaſure of the Father, to the ſacrifice of the Meſſiah, as Lamb of God. And as the diſciples of Jeſus underſtood not this charaćter of the Meſfiah, till he had opened their underſtandings after his reſurreótion, and given them a right notion of that attribute; ſo neither, it may be preſumed, could John have ſeen and aſſigned the real ground of human juſtification, in conſequence of the Father's good pleaſure in the Meſſiah, without a divine revelation of more extent and preciſion, than could be traced in his doćtrine before the baptiſm of Jeſus. For the attribute, Lamb of God, implies the whole of S that 258 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony that which an Apoſtle, after the deſcent of the Holy Spirit on the diſciples, thus comprehen- fively deſcribed 7; “God hath predeſtinated us “ unto the adoption of children by Jéſus Chriſt, “according to the good pleaſure of his will, to “ the praiſe of the glory of his grace, wherein he “ hath made us accepted in the Beloved, in “whom we have redemption through his blood, “even the forgiveneſs of fins.” As the Meſſiah came principally to fulfil this character of re- deemer by his death, it was impoſſible to point him out to the people, by a more ſtriking and endearing attribute. And, upon this occaſion, the Goſpel-writer accumulates ſome preceding teſtimonies of the Baptiſt, and repreſents him as applying them all perſonally to Jeſus. “ a Be- “hold the Lamb of God, which taketh away “ the ſins of the world ! This is he, of whom H. “ ſaid, After me cometh a man, which is pre- “ferred before me : for he was before me ; and “I knew him not ; but that he ſhould be made “manifeſt unto Iſrael, therefore am I come bap- “tizing with water; (and John bare record, “ ſaying, I ſaw the Spirit deſcending from hea- “ven like a dove, and it abode upon him;) and I “knew him not; but he that ſent me to baptize “ with water, the ſame ſaid unto me, Upon “whom thou ſhalt fee the Spirit deſcending and “remaining on him, the ſame is he which bap- * Fph, i. 5. * John i. 29. - “ tizeth of John the Baptiſt. 250 “tizeth with the Holy Ghoſt: and I ſaw, and “ bare record that this is the Son of God.” As the great perſonal attribute, Son of God, in the cloſe of this extract, will be conſidered hereafter, obſervations upon a part only of this paſſage will be offered here. The Baptiſt aſſerts; “I knew him not; but “ that he ſhould be made manifeſt unto Iſrael, “ therefore am I come, baptizing with water.” Upon applying here what was formerly ob- ſerved on the aſſertion, “I knew him not,” this whole clauſe may poſſibly be allowed to import, that the purpoſe of the baptiſmal miniſtry, name- ly, to manifeſt the Meſfiah to Iſrael, was revealed to John, when he received the commiſſion to baptize; but that neither the individual perſon of the Meſſiah, nor the particular incident where- by he would become known to John as ſuch, was revealed to him, either at his original call, or at any time before the coming of Jeſus to Jordan. It was then that he ceaſed to be ſtrićtly the Forerunner, and became properly a Witneſs; and it was then that he knew him by another revelation. This whole verſe is ſet down by the Goſpel-writer, as the continued language of the Baptiſt. And that circumſtance, as it ap- pears, requires to be carefully noted; for the caſe ſeems to be otherwiſe with the verſe next enſuing. In that, the Evangeliſt breaks off the words of the Baptiſt, and interpoſes a parentheſis S 2 to 260 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony to ſhew that the baptiſm of water had, in fact, brought on the manifeſtation of the Meſfiah to Iſrael. He ſpeaks in his own perſon, though he applies ſome of the Baptiſt's words to the great incident.—“And John bare record, ſay- “ing, I ſaw the Spirit deſcending from heaven “like a dove, and it abode upon him.” The verſe ſeems to me elliptical, and may be thus filled up, by recurring to the words that pre- ceded; “And John bare record, ſaying, (he was “ accordingly manifeſted by the baptiſm of water) “ Foraſmuch as I ſaw the Spirit deſcending from “heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him,” 3ri Teffézwa. To avčwa, &c. This parentheſis c of the Goſpel-writer ſpecifies only that viſible ſign from which John manifeſted the Meſſiah to Iſrael, but not that revelation from which the Baptiſt knew him. And to reſtore the connec- tion between the verſe immediately following the parentheſis and that which preceded it, and to alleviate the interruption occaſioned by this interpoſition of a ſentence, the Evangeliſt has * Another inſtance of a parentheſis, ſomewhat ſimilar to this, oc- curs in ver. I4. of this chapter,-O A6)0; adºpé iyśvero, xzi tax%rwoey iv %pºv (kai i8tagºpiša rºw %2, airs, 3%a, & govoyings rage warpès) raž- en; x&gºro; wai danºsſo.g. There will be no neceſſity, with ſome cri- tics, for underſtanding ražens, as put for the accuſative, if the pa- rentheſis here be taken as a whole by itſelf, in which the Evangeliſt gave an inſtance of the viſible glory of the Logos, in his tabernacle of the fleſh, namely, in the Transfiguration, to which Peter refers in his ſecond Epiſtle, i. 17, 18. repeated of John the Baptiſt. 261 repeated the diſclaiming clauſe, “I knew him “ not,” and with it again returned to the ſub- ject-matter of the thirty-firſt verſe. If there- fore the firſt and laſt of the three verſes be thrown together, and the repetition ſtill pre- ſerved, their import may be thus repreſented; I knew him not, but was expreſsly ſent to mani- feſt him unto Iſrael by the baptiſm of water.—I knew him not, but had been informed that it was he, on whom I ſhould ſee the Spirit deſcend and abide, who would baptize with the Holy Ghoſt. The Baptiſt mentions two points, which were made known to him at his original call; and alſo indicates another, which was left at that time unrevealed ; and he appears not to have given any intimation that he ſhould not, or that he did not, know the Meſſiah, till the viſible deſcent of the Spirit upon him. The inconſiſtency, which has been ſuppoſed to fubſiſt between the aſſertion, “I knew him not,” and his words to Jeſus at Jordan, “I have need “ to be baptized of thee,” ſeems entirely to have ariſen from extending the meaning of the clauſe, “I knew him not,” beyond that point of time, when Jeſus preſented himſelf to be baptized. At that inſtant, as it was before obſerved, he became known to John, and continued ſo while he per- formed his baptiſmal office, and when the Spirit deſcended; and the Baptiſt ſeems not, either in this paſſage or any other, to have given juſt ground for ſuppoſing, that he baptized Jeſus S 3 upon 262 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony upon any other footing than as the Meſſiah, con- feſſedly known ; and has only ſaid, that him, whom he was ſent to manifeſt, and on whom he ſhould ſee the Spirit deſcend, he knew not before they met at the river Jordan. This ſeems the whole import of the verſes; and they relate rather to the means of manifeſting the Meſſiah to Iſrael, than of revealing him to John ; which points appear entirely diſtinét, and materially different. For this ſenſible ſign was the evi- dence, intended to be given by John to others, of the divine character of Jeſus. To this uſe of it he had been directed. And although the ſign did not notify the Meſſiah to him, yet it was of great weight in the proſecution of his office. It made him a witneſs, in that ſame inſtance, wherein he had been only a prophet before. His former prediction might ſtill be delivered, but with the advantage of be- ing confirmed and juſtified by the ſign; “This “ is he, of whom I ſaid, After me cometh a “man, which is preferred before me”—“The “ ſame is he, which baptizeth with the Holy “Ghoſt;” for the Holy Ghoſt viſibly deſcended, and abode upon him. “And I ſaw, and bare “ record, that this is the Son of God.” And when the Baptiſt atteſted the deſcent of the Spirit upon Jeſus, he appealed in fact to a ſignal and public miracle, in behalf of his own inſpired character. As he did no miracle, he could not have aſſerted, “This is the Son of God,” upon any of John the Baptiſt. 263 any ſtronger ground than divine revelation to himſelf, if the ſenſible ſign of the deſcent of the Spirit upon Jeſus could not have been urged by him, as a divine atteſtation to his own veracity. So that the ſign was of great importance even to the Baptiſt, although it were not wanted to no- tify the Meſſiah to him. * This paſſage then, if this illuſtration of it may be admitted, will tend, together with the general ſubſtance of the preceding remarks, to ſupport theſe concluſions; that authority to ačt as the Forerunner and Witneſs to the Meſſiah was given to John at his call; but that a conſiderable part of his qualifications for the diſcharge of both thoſe offices was imparted to him during his miniſtry; and that, as he could not have un- dertaken, as Forerunner, ſuch a baptiſm of water, and have known that divine purpoſe which was intended by it, except by the word of the Lord originally; ſo neither could he thus have con- dućted his office, as a Witneſs, with ſucceſs, through ſituations which he did not foreſee, without further inſpiration from God, and with- out a ſign from heaven. - S 4 SECTION 264 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony SECTION IV. Witneſs of the Baptiſt to Jeſus, after he had commenced his miniſtry—the character, “Son “of God,” which the Baptiſt attributed to Jeſus, conſidered—further attributes of dignity, which John not long before his impriſonment aſcribed to Jeſus, conſidered—ſummary view of the doc- trines of the Baptiſt, before his impriſonment, as Forerunner and Witneſs. THE baptiſmal doćtrines and prophecies of John, as the Forerunner, have been already diſ- cuſſed ; but his teſtimonies, as the Witneſs of the Meſſiah, having been as yet illuſtrated only in part, let us now attend to thoſe, which were delivered by the Baptiſt, after Jeſus had actually colle&ted diſciples, and aſſumed a prophetical cha- racter. * For this purpoſe the great attribute of Jeſus, “Son of God,” may properly be conſidered ; and as the ſenſe, in which John underſtood that title, may perhaps be determined by thoſe teſtimonies of his that will next occur, the il- luſtration of that attribute has been reſerved to this place. “I ſaw, and bare d record, that this is the Son “ of God.” The words may poſſibly imply that * “Mºzafrápnx2, have borne record." John of John the Baptiſt. 265 John had commonly aſcribed this title to Jeſus, before he had returned from the temptation, and again preſented himſelf to the Baptiſt. But how- ever that may be, the attribute is here applied perſonally to Jeſus; and the words of the Baptiſt bear an evident reference, both to the deſcent of the Spirit upon Jeſus, which he ſaw, and to the Voice of the Father, which he heard. The de- ſcent of the Spirit was a ſign to him and to the people, that Jeſus ſhould baptize with the Holy Ghoſt; and the Voice from heaven was a new revelation, that Jeſus was the beloved Son of God. The Baptiſt was thereby enabled, as the Witneſs to the Meſſiah, to aſſign the ground of thoſe attributes, which, as Forerunner, he had prophetically aſcribed to him ; and the words of the Father, “Thou art my beloved Son,” as they were underſtood by John, immediately led to the mention of an attribute, “ He was before me,” which the Baptiſt had not aſcribed to the Meſ- ſiah, till after the Voice from heaven. What John aſſerted in that attribute had no relation either to the Meſſiah’s miniſtry, as a prophet, or his exiſtence, as a man. He came after the Baptiſt in both reſpects; and if the attribute, “He was before me,” were applied in either of theſe ſenſes, John would thereby directly con- tradict his own previous teſtimony, as well as the reſt of the Goſpel-hiſtory of Jeſus. It ſeems, then, that whatever authority the title, beloved Son of God, gave to the Baptiſt, for repreſenting Jeſus 266 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Jeſus as antecedent to himſelf, it muſt afford him the ſame ground for aſſerting, that Jeſus pre- exiſted as Son of God; and it therefore appears, that John applied this title perſonally to Jeſus, in that ſtrićt ſenſe, wherein it was afterwards aſ- fumed by Jeſus himſelf. But other expreſſions of the Baptiſt, in the further diſcharge of his office as a Witneſs, will contribute to ſhew, that he applied the attribute, beloved Son of God, as expreſſive of perſonal, and not only of official dignity in Jeſus. For Jeſus ſoon after his baptiſm began to call diſciples; and at Jeruſalem, during the Paſſover, he authoritatively expelled from the temple * thoſe who profaned his Father's houſe, wrought miracles, and delivered his doćtrines openly. His diſciples alſo, ačting under his immediate com- miſſion, baptized the people in Judaea, unto faith in the Meſſiah, as John did before, and even at that very time *; and Jeſus returned not into Galilee, until he “ knew how the Phariſees had “heard that he made and baptized more diſciples “ than John h.” It may perhaps ſeem to have been his intention, to bring on a compariſon be- tween himſelf and the Baptiſt; that occaſion might from thence be given to John, before his miniſtry expired, of bearing teſtimony to Jeſus in the actual exerciſe of his office. • John ii. 15. * John iii. 22. compared with iv. 2. g John iii. 23. h John iv. I. f Accord- of John the Baptiſt. 267 Accordingly, a diſpute aroſe concerning the two baptiſms, in which the diſciples of John took the lead againſt the Jews, and complained to their maſter, that his province was invaded, and the credit and ſucceſs of his own miniſtry fur- paſſed. “Rabbii, he that was with thee beyond “Jordan, to whom thou bareſt witneſs, behold, “ the ſame baptizeth, and all men come unto “ him.” This drew from the Baptiſt an anſwer, which in ſome particulars ſtrongly intimates in what an exalted ſenſe.he applied the title, Son of God. He began with aſſuring his diſciples, that the ſucceſs of Jeſus and his own were both given from above, in a juſt proportion to the diſparity of their offices ; ſince he was the Forerunner only, but Jeſus was the Bridegroom * and Lord of the Church, that ſpiritual bride, which was deſtined for him alone. If ſhe were diſpoſed to meet him with affection and duty; if ſhe were received and welcomed with his favour, this was all, which his own miſſion from God had been intended to accompliſh "; this was all, which it remained for him to deſire; “This my joy there- “ fore is fulfilled,” he ſaid; “ He muſt increaſe, ‘‘ but I muſt decreaſe.” After this he enlarges on the dignity of Jeſus, * John iii. 26. * Iſaiah liv. 5, 6. lxii. 5. Jerem. iii. 14. Matth, xxii. 2. Epheſ. y, 27. Rev. xxi. 9. | Pſalm xlv. II. in 2 Corinth. xi, 2. COIl- 268 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony conſidering him, as he goes on, in the light of a public teacher, at that time actually diſcharging his office. “He that cometh from above is above aii ".” He taught, what the Apoſtles afterwards more fully ſet forth, that the Meſſiah was not taken from among men, but came down from heaven”; that he had by inheritance obtained a more ex- cellent name than angels P, and both by his ori- gin and miſſion was above all, whether prophets of the earth", or miniſtering ſpirits of heaven'. “What he hath ſeen and heard, that he teſti- “fieth.” Prophets, who came not immediately from heaven, and were not, like him, “above “all,” could make no diſcoveries to men of di- vine things, except by communication, and that according to the meaſure of their imperfect fa- culties. But the teſtimony of the Son of God was founded upon his own perſonal knowledge, intuitive and unlimited. “And no man receiveth his teſtimony.” This feems a direct prophecy of the Meſfiah's rejećtion by the Jews; but without contradićting a pre- ceding clauſe, “he muſt increaſe.” The relation of the two clauſes is different ; for the ultimate ſucceſs of the Meſſiah’s miniſtry is one thing, but his immediate rejection by the body of the " Rom. ix. 5. Compare I Corinth. xv. 47. 9 John iii. 31. P Hebr. i. 4. ‘l Heb. i. 1, 2. * Heb. i. 14. Iſraelitiſh of John the Baptiſt. 269 Iſraelitiſh nation is another; and both are pre- dićted by the Baptiſt. “He that hath received his teſtimony hath “ ſet to his ſeals, that God is true.” Hitherto the Law and the prophets had propheſied; but now the age of accompliſhment was come. Chriſt is the end of the Law ; and the viſion and the prophecy are now ſealed up t, as “all the pro- “ miſes of God in him are Yea and Amen u.” The teſtimony of Jeſus accordingly yields the great and ultimate demonſtration of the truth of God, with reſpect both to his promiſes by all the prophets, and to his witneſs to Jeſus by his Voice from heaven. “For he, whom God hath ſent, ſpeaketh the “words of God’.” All divine meſſengers may be ſaid to have ſpoken the “words of God;” but “ the words of God” are attributed to Jeſus, not only in conſequence of his divine miſſion, in which reſpect he reſembles the earthly prophets; but alſo in conſequence of his divine origin, as the beloved Son of God, which title belongs pro- perly and excluſively to him. The divinity of that doćtrine, which Jeſus then actually deli- vered, was neceſſarily implied by the ſubſequent clauſe,_* For God giveth not the Spirit by mea- “ ſure unto him.” From inſtances which have occurred, the influence of the Spirit upon John * See Wolf. Eph. i. 13. * Dan, ix. 24. * 2 Cor. i. 29. * See I John v. Io, I 1. appeared 276 On the Prophecies and Tºftimony appeared to be limited ; and all other prophets received it, like him, occaſionally, and by mea- ſure. But the prerogative of Jeſus was tranſcend- ent. As it pleaſed the Father', that “in him all “ fullneſs, and all the treaſures of wiſdom and “knowledge, ſhould dwell,” the Spirit had no attribute, which was not continual and entire in him *. “The Father loveth the Son, and hath given “all things into his hand.” Here the Baptiſt al- ludes to the voice of the Father from heaven ; and aſſigns the proper foundation of the tran- foendent prerogatives of Jeſus, by referring to this title, “Thou art my beloved Son.” Agree- ably to the import of this teſtimony, Jeſus is re- preſented elſewhere in the New Teſtament, as the Lord and heira of all things, even of thoſe which the Father himſelf claimeth; ſupreme, not only as a Prophet, but alſo, as the King and Judge of all. “ He that believeth on the Son hath ever- “ laſting life.” The juſt ſhall live by faith in him, for their life b is in the Son. He will con- fer it upon us, or refuſe it, hereafter, as we be- lieve or deny him here. This ſignal teſtimony to Jeſus was not deli- vered long before the impriſonment of the Bap- tiſt, in which his miniſtry expired. He repeats 2 y Coloſ. i. 19, ii. 3. - * John xvi. 15. * Matth, xxi. 38. Rom. iv., 13. Heb. i. z. * I John v. 1 r. and of John the Baptiſt. 271 and enlarges ſome particulars, which he had mentioned before; but he now diſplays the whole character of the Meſfiah, in much more expreſs and magnificent terms than he had hitherto em- ployed. His coming down from heaven ; the tranſcendent excellence of his official qualifica- tions; juſtification by faith" in him ; and eternal life, at his diſpoſal, as the reward of that faith ; theſe are all of them Evangelical doctrines, con- ſonant indeed to the genuine import of ancient Scripture, but entirely unknown in Iſrael: and therefore in delivering them the Baptiſt acted as a prophet; and in applying them with others to Jeſus, at that time exerciſing his miniſterial of fice, he acted as a Witneſs. Some of the principal characters, which are here aſcribed to the Meſſiah, namely, that he came down from heaven, and teſtified what he had ſeen and heard, and was above all, appear to be immediately grounded upon that declaration of the Father from heaven, “ Thou art my be- “loved Son.” And theſe, if taken together with another already mentioned by the Baptiſt, “He “ was before me,” ſeem to render it a juſt con- cluſion, that the title, Son of God, was applied by John, as the attribute, not ſimply of the Meſ- ſiah's office, but alſo of the perſon of Jeſus; and the amount of theſe teſtimonies is nearly equiva- * Not by the works of the Law, which was the principle of the Jews. lent 272 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony lent to the confeſſion of St. Peter, after long ac- quaintance with the doćtrines and miracles of Jeſus; “Thou art Chriſt, the Son of the living ** God d.” It ſeems to have been the divine in- tention, that the eye of faith, ſhould be led on from a view of the glorified humanity of Jeſus, to that of his divinity; and the language of the Baptiſt was ſtrićtly accommodated to that deſign, by repreſenting the title, beloved Son of God, as implying not only the extraordinary gifts and tranſcendent eminence of Jeſus, as a prophet, but alſo his pre-exiſtence in heaven, and near rela- tion to the Father. Thus the Baptiſt acted, for ſome ſpace of time, as the Forerunner, and for a much longer, as the Witneſs of the Meſſiah. He knew him not, while he continued merely his Forerunner, and was preparing the Jews, by baptiſm, and by the correótion of their principles and manners, to expect and receive him with faith. Upon the public appearance of Jeſus, John firſt knew him by immediate revelation; and at his requiſition, and againſt the previous dićtate of his own mind, baptized him to his office. It was then he be- came his Witneſs; and he immediately notified his actual appearance, and teſtified that he ſaw the Holy Spirit then deſcend and abide upon him, and heard the Father from heaven pro- nounce him his beloved Son. Ere long he pub- * Matth. xvi. 16. licly of John the Baptiſt. 273 licly pointed him out in perſon, as the Son of God, atteſted by that ſign, and proclaimed by that voice, from heaven ; and upon the expreſ- ſions then uſed by the Father, and interpreted by the Spirit to the Baptiſt, he grounded, and aſcribed perſonally to Jeſus, the charaćter of uni- verſal Redeemer; aſſerted his preexiſtence in heaven, and deſcent from thence; his perſonal and unlimited knowledge of divine things, and the immeaſurable fullneſs of his ſpiritual gifts and powers; his univerſal ſuperiority and domi- nion, and the nearneſs of his relation to God, as his beloved Son. And further, when Jeſus actu- ally entered upon his office, and authorized his diſciples to baptize, and in the number of his followers ſurpaſſed the ſucceſs of John, he knew and felt that the purpoſe of his own miſſion was anſwered; and in terms of great energy, and highly expreſſive of his eminent humility and pious reſignation, he even propheſied that the concluſion of his office was near; “He that hath. “ the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend “ of the bridegroom, which ſtandeth “ and hear- “eth him, rejoiceth greatly becauſe of the bride- “groom's voice: this my joy therefore is ful- “ filled; he muſt increaſe, but I muſt decreaſe.” - i. e. miniſtereth. Comp. Zech. iii. 7. Grot. ad I. T SECTION 2 7 4 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony SECTION V. The queſtion, whether John ačied, even under im- priſonment, as a Witneſs to Jeſus, conſidered— reflections on John's miſſion of his diſciples to Jeſus. THAT event ſoon followed, which verified the predićtion of the Baptiſt. For his miniſtry, the ſucceſs of which declined upon the growing ma- nifeſtation of Jeſus in Judaea, was brought very near its cloſe by his impriſonment. Yet perhaps that “burning and ſhining light,” in which the people had been willing to rejoice for a ſeaſon, though now rendered faint and dim, did not im- mediately expire. For it may poſſibly appear, upon examination, that even in the priſon John endeavoured to promote the reception of the Meſſiah, and ſtill acted the part of a Witneſs to Jeſus, then fully exerciſing his great office. In order to illuſtrate this point, it muſt be previouſly obſerved, that, upon the impriſonment of the Baptiſt, Jeſus went from Judaea into Ga- lilee, and there preached, “Repent ye, and be- “lieve the Goſpel";” he called the Twelve, and atteſted his divine miſſion by ſigns and wonders, accompanied with every circumſtance, that might tend to render them affecting and convincing. * Mark i. 15. Accord- of John the Baptiſt. 275 Accordingly, “there came a fear on all; and “ they glorified God, ſaying, That a great prophet “is riſen up among us; and, That God hath vi- “ ſited his people. And this rumour of him went “forth throughout all Judaea, and throughout “all the region round about".” Jeſus then no- toriouſly verified that ſignal prophecy of the Bap- tiſt, “He that cometh after me is mightier than “I;” and as that natural and juſt remark, “ All “things that John ſpake of this man were “true",” was delivered before the paſſion of Je- ſus, it evidently related to his mighty works and doctrines, as confeſſedly predićted by the Baptiſt. The powerful effect of the works of Jeſus upon the minds of the people in general ſeems not to have exceeded their impreſſion upon the diſciples of the Baptiſt. In the priſon they acquainted him with the doćtrines of Jeſus, with his call of the Apoſtles, and his miracles. That jealouſy for the honour of their maſter, which had before led ſome of them to make a ſimilar repreſentation to him of the ſucceſs of Jeſus, was probably one of their preſent inducements to ſhew him all theſe things. Upon receiving this intelligence, the Baptiſt “called unto him two of theſe diſci- “ples,” and ſenti them unto Jeſus, ſaying, “Art # Luke vii. 16, 17. * John x. 41. i Of this meſſage ſee Epiſcop. Inſtit. Theol. lib. iii. cap. 25. Jor- tin's Diſc. on Chriſtianity, ch. v. Macknight on Harmony, S. 42. I.ightfoot on Matth. xi. 3. T 2 “ thou 276 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “ thou he that ſhould come, or do we look for “ another ?” The ſubſequent conſiderations may perhaps have ſome tendency to explain and juſti- fy this conduct of the Baptiſt. This meſſage is placed by St. Luke immedi- ately after his account of the raiſing of the wi- dow's ſon from the dead; and the mighty works of Jeſus probably had induced the diſciples of John to admit, like Nicodemus and otherk Jews, that he was “a teacher come from God.” For this appears implied in the very terms and tenor of the queſtion ; as it ſeems ſtrictly calculated to bring on a determination, not whether Jeſus bore any, but what divine character; “Art thou he “ that ſhould come, or do we look for another º’’ Art thou the Meſſiah himſelf, or comeſt thou before him * To explain and confirm this conſtruction, it may be obſerved, that the Jews univerſally be- lieved that Elias muſt firſt come. In conſequence of this received opinion, the meſſengers of the Council had enquired of the Baptiſt himſelf, “Art thou Elias P’’ and as he anſwered, “I am “ not,” the public expectation of Elias to precede the Meſſiah would remain no leſs prevalent than before, although John were taken for a prophet; and there are in the Goſpel-hiſtory evident traces of it at a later period. * Others of the Jews, who looked not on him as the Meſfiah, yet, it is ſaid, believed on him on account of his miracles. John vii. 31. Stillingfleet's Orig. Sac. book ii, ch. 9. 259. - - It of John the Baptiſt. 277 It may be added, that Elias was highly cele- brated in Iſrael, on account of his miraculous power. The ſon of Sirach delivers the Jewiſh opinion in this caſe: “O Elias, how waſt thou “ honoured in thy wondrous deeds, and who “may glory like unto thee; who didſt raiſe up a “ dead man from death, and his ſoul from the “ place of the dead, by the word of the moſt “High!!” The miracles of Jeſus, and eſpecially his raiſing two perſons from the dead, might therefore, it may be conceived, rather incline the Jews to take him for Elias. It may further be remarked, that the Meſſiah was expected to manifeſt himſelf in outward ſplendor and majeſty. The humble ſtate of Je- ſus would therefore naturally diſpoſe the people to believe, that the character of Meſſiah could not belong to him. From theſe conſiderations, when taken in con- junction, namely, that according to the Jewiſh opinions ºn Elias was then to come ; and that, as Jeſus wrought miracles, and particularly raiſed the dead, he was the more likely to be really Elias; but, as he did not appear in outward pomp and greatneſs, could not, as they appre- hended, be the Meſſiah ; it may perhaps ſeem credible, that the diſciples of John, like many of ! Ecclus. xlviii. 4. m Trypho objećts to Juſtin, that Elias muſt firſt come, to anoint the Meſſiah. Whitby on Matth. xvii. 10. T 3 their 278 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony their countrymenn, miſtook Jeſus for Elias; and that it was the real wiſh and deſign of the Bap- tiſt to correct this particular error, by ſending two of them to Jeſus with a queſtion ſo framed, as neceſſarily to bring on a deciſion to over-rule their miſtake; “Art thou he that ſhould come, “ or do we look for another P’’ Art thou the Meffiah, or will he come after thee The Baptiſt evidently knew the real character of Jeſus; and any ſuppoſition that he made this enquiry for his own ſake ſeems irreconcileable with the whole of his former conduct as the Witneſs of the Meſſiah, and particularly with that full and eminent teſtimony, to which he had been led by the former report of his follow- ers, that Jeſus baptized, and all men came unto him. It may then be reaſonably ſuppoſed, that the Baptiſt acted from a regard to his diſciples, and not to himſelf. In order to account for his ſending them to Jeſus, it may be obſerved, that he had often at- teſted the divine character of Jeſus at large to all his diſciples; ſome o of whom had made the right uſe of his teſtimony, and conſequently fol- lowed Jeſus. But other diſciples of John had aćted otherwiſe, and, by obſtinately adhering to their maſter, diſappointed his endeavours, and fruſtrated the great end of his miſſion. In theſe circumſtances, the Baptiſt could have little re- * Matth. xvi. 14. Luke ix. 8. • John i. 36, 37. liance of John the Baptiſt. 270 liance on the effect of his own exhortations, and might rather chooſe to refer his diſciples to Je- ſus, than in his own perſon to repeat teſtimo- nies, which, however expreſs and frequent, had made no proper impreſſion upon them. Beſides; if he had renewed his own teſtimo- nies to the real character of Jeſus, even with ſucceſs, the ſame effect would then have fol- lowed, which the meſſage itſelf brought on. In either caſe, the diſciples would have repaired to Jeſus, and would thereby have fallen under the immediate influence of his doćtrines and mira- cles; and thoſe had unqueſtionably the ſame power to convince the followers of John, whe- ther it were the teſtimony or the meſſage of their maſter that gave them occaſion to hear thoſe doctrines, and to ſee thoſe miracles. But the teſtimony of the Baptiſt, if it had been re- peated, might not have rendered them more ready at this time than before to follow Jeſus, and to inform themſelves of the nature and evi- dence of his divine character. But this effect, which was all that could be hoped from the mere teſtimony of John, and which might pro- bably not have followed from it, was now abſo- lutely enſured by John's ſending his diſciples with ſuch a queſtion to Jeſus. To theſe conſiderations it may be added fur- ther, that the miracles of Jeſus had afforded the ground of that attribute, “He that cometh after “ me is mightier than I,” and were greater wit- T 4 neſs 280 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony neſs to Jeſus than that of John. The Baptiſt therefore, by ſending his diſciples to Jeſus, really ſhewed them the accompliſhment of his own prophetical teſtimony, and placed them under the immediate impreſſion of that witneſs to the divine character of Jeſus, which far ſurpaſſed any teſtimony, that he either was then or had been at any time enabled to give. If then the meſſage of the Baptiſt may be placed in this light, he will probably ſeem to have proceeded in the ſureſt, and therefore in the kindeſt, way, to promote the ſpiritual advan- tage of his followers; and his condućt in this reſpect may appear moſt fuitable to one great purpoſe of his office as a Witneſs, namely, that of pointing out the perſon of the Meſſiah, and directing the people to him ; and moſt conſonant with the view, under which he appeared to think and act at all times after the public appear- ance of the Meſſiah, of diſcouraging an excluſive adherence, and even any leading regard to him- felf. & Jeſus referred the diſciples of John to the pre- ſent evidence of his miracles and doćtrines, as ſufficient to determine their queſtion. The things which they then ſaw plainly ſhewed that he bore ſome divine character, and if any, that very cha- raēter which he aſſumed. And his intimations, that the poor had the Goſpel preached to them, and that all were bleſſed who ſhould not be of fended in him, were both of them obviouſly ſuited - of John the Baptiſł. 281 fuited to prevent his lowly condition from ren- dering John's diſciples averſe to believe that he really was “He that ſhould come.” They were at the ſame time directed to go and ſhew John again the things, which they had heard and ſeen. As he had dićtated their queſ- tion, and was held by them in the higheſt reve- rence, an application of that evidence, which they had now heard and ſeen, was likely to come the nearer to their hearts, when it ſhould be ex- plained and enforced upon them by him. And, as Jeſus commonly declined to bear teſtimony to himſelf, and to aſſert directly that he was the Meſſiah, it may ſeem probable that in this in- ſtance, as in all others, he would have left the operation of his doćtrines and miracles upon the minds of John's diſciples to themſelves, if it had not been the abſolute office of their maſter to notify the Meſſiah to the people. Upon this explanation of the meſſage, the Baptiſt will appear to have been, even during his impriſonment, a Witneſs to Jeſus, and to have maintained to the laſt that convićtion, under which he had acted from the firſt, that Jeſus was the Meſſiah. Hence alſo that illuſtrious teſtimo- ny to the charaćter of the Baptiſt, which Jeſus delivered immediately as the meſſengers of John departed, will ſeem to have an eaſy and natural introdućtion. He was not “a reed, ſhaken with “ the wind ;” but immoveable in principle, and ſteady in teſtimony. He appeared a prophet, in unfold- 282 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony &c. unfolding the genuine ſenſe of former prophe- cies; in enforcing them with circumſtances un- known and original; in opening and characteriz- ing the Goſpel-kingdom of the Meſfiah ; in pro- claiming his immediate approach, and predićting many of his attributes: and he ought to be re- puted even more than a prophet, in baptizing the Meſſiah to his office; in atteſting that he was a&tually come ; in pointing him out in per- ſon, as the Redeemer and Sanctifier of the world, and the Son of God. The proper application of theſe prophecies and this teſtimony of John has been made by the mighty one, whoſe Forerunner and Witneſs he was ; “If ye will receive it, this is Elias that “ was for to come P;-He that hath ears to hear, “let him hear.” P Matth, xi, 14. O N T H E TROPHE CIES AND TESTIMONY O F JOHN THE BAPTIST, A N D T H E PARALLEL PROPHECIES O F JESUS CHRIST. PART III. S E C T I O N I. Conſideration of ſuch miracles and prophecies of Jeſus, as related to characters, prophecies, and teſtimonies applied to him by the Baptiſt— ſhort reflection as to the reality and divinity of the miracles of Jeſus—view of the miracles of Jeſus, as prophetical, and inference from it. IT has been already ſhewn that the Baptiſt, as the Forerunner of the Meſſiah, had predićted his coming, and indicated ſome of his attributes; and, as Witneſs, had pointed out Jeſus per- ſonally as the mighty one that ſhould come, foraſmuch as the Spirit of God had viſibly de- - ſcended 284 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ſcended from heaven and abode upon him, and the voice of the Father had at the ſame time de- clared him his beloved Son. In order to ſhew further, both the completion of the prophecy delivered by the Baptiſt, as the Forerunner of the Meſſiah, and the truth of his teſtimony, as a Witneſs to him, let us now turn to ſome of the many ſignal evidences which the Holy Spirit gave of his continually dwelling in Jeſus during his public miniſtry; and conſider ſuch of his prophecies, as immediately related either to characters which John had attributed to him, or to prophecies and teſtimonies reſpect- ing him, which had been delivered by the Bap- tiſt. The firſt attribute which John prophetically aſcribed to the Meſſiah was contained in the following words; “He that cometh after me “ is mightier than I.” As the ancient Scrip- tures had predicted the miracles of the Meſſiah, and were in a that reſpect, though not in all, rightly underſtood by the Jews, the attribute of Power was confeſſedly the great characteriſtic of the Meſfiah's miniſtry. And Jeſus appropriated to himſelf this prophetical character, by openly exerting a mighty power, at his will, by his word, at hand or at a diſtance, upon animate or inanimate nature, and over the inviſible world ; againſt him that had the power of death, and * See Grot, on John ix. 32. againſt of John the Baptiſt. $28.5 againſt the ſpirits of darkneſs. Jeſus fulfilled the prophecy of the Baptiſt, by this exerciſe of power; and alſo verified his teſtimony, by thus ſenſibly diſplaying his glory. For as Jeſus caſt out devils by the Spirit of God, and as the Father who dwelt in him did the works, the ſigns and wonders of Jeſus gave witneſs, both of the Spirit that deſcended from heaven and abode upon him, and of the Father, whoſe voice declared him his beloved Son. As the reality and divinity of the miracles of Jeſus are points, that fall not properly within the preſent ſubject, which relates to his prophecies only; it will not be allowable to offer more than a ſhort obſervation or two upon them. As all ſenſible facts whatſoever are credible upon adequate teſtimony, it ſeems that they will not become incredible, merely becauſe they are miraculous. The only queſtion then that can be reaſonably made will reſpect the ſufficiency of the evidence. Nor will the regularity of the operations of nature afford an inſuperable objection to the credibility of a miracle; for the teſtimony of eyewitneſſes yields greater evidence in behalf of the miracle, than the regularity of nature can bring againſt it ; the one, as poſitive, ought in reaſon to overrule the other, as only preſumptive. And when the character of the Apoſtles, and * John xiv. 19. their 286 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony their motives c to preach the Goſpel, with their number and agreement", and all the circum- ſtances that can be and have been urged in their favour, are taken together into conſideration; that their teſtimony ſhould yet after all be falſe, ſeems infinitely more wonderful" and proportion- ably leſs credible, than the very miracles which they atteſt. -- The credibility of the miracles of Jeſus muſt therefore reſt, not upon the nature of the facts, but only upon the evidence that is brought to aſcertain them ; and if the teſtimony of the Apoſtles cannot reaſonably be rejected, all pre- vious queſtions will be excluded, and the mira- cles of Jeſus muſt be admitted, as real. When the earlieſt adverſaries of the Goſpel either pretended that miracles f were not cha- A---------> 4- - --> * See Stillingfleet's Orig. Sacr. book ii. ch. 9, §. 9. Campbell, Auth. Goſp. Hiſt. ſect. xiv. pag. 152. * * See Laëtant. de Juſtitia, lib. v. cap. 3. * The remark of Chryſoſtom may be applied to the Apoſtles, Ef onºsſov (Xeſ; 8) ×opis firstaav, Toxº, usićov tº Szºp.o. paſſerai, ap. Stillingfleet, O.S. b. ii. ch. Io. §. 5. Hume's Eff, on Miracles, pag. 182, 183. - * Maimonides, de Reg. cap. xi, ſays, “Do not imagine that the “ king Meſfiah ſhall have any need to alter the courſe of nature, or to “ raiſe the dead." (Biſhop Patrick. Witneſſes to the Son of God, pag. 181.)—He aſſerts alſo, (de Fund. Leg. cap. viii. 1.) “That the Iſraelites “ did not believe Moſes from the miracles, which he wrought:"—and elſewhere, “That Elias and Eliſha wrought not their miracles to confirm “ their prophecies.” This ſeems extorted from him by the irreſiſtible evidence of Chriſt's miracles; for he ſays, (ibid. vii. §. 12.) “We be- “lieve not every one that ſhews a ſign, or doth a miracle, to be a “ prophet, unleſs we have known him from the beginning, to be fit “ for of John the Baptiſt. 287 racteriſtical evidences of the Meſſiah; or im- puted the mighty works of Jeſus to magical or diabolical power in him; or attempted to tra- duce" and depreciate them ; they ſeem to have felt the inconteſtable force of the Apoſtolical teſtimony, and virtually to have given up all ob- jection to the reality of the miracles of Jeſus. And if enemies to Chriſtianity ſo able and de- termined, as Maimonides, Celſus, Julian h, and others i, could not diſcredit the teſtimony of the Apoſtles, and deny that the mighty works of Jeſus were real, it ſeems entirely inconceivable that exceptions, which appeared unreaſonable in the days of thoſe adverſaries, can be made upon any juſter ground in our own, to the teſtimony of the Apoſtles, and to the reality of the mira- cles of Jeſus. And if the reality of the miracles of Jeſus cannot juſtly be diſallowed, the divinity of them will neceſſarily follow from their nature and effect. For as they k tended to overturn the “ for prophecy; that, in his wiſdom, and his works, he hath ex- “ celled his contemporaries, and hath walked in the ways of prophecy, “ in holineſs and ſeparation from others." His reſervation probably was, we know not what, or whence, Chriſt is, and therefore his mira- cles are no evidence at all. “Nihil non nugaciſſimi mortalium fin- “ gunt, ne cogantur agnoſcere, virtute ac digito guaſ: ipſius Dei, Je- “ ſum noſtrum effeciſe miracula ſua.” Vorſtius. See Stillingfleet, O.S, b. ii. ch. 6. pag. 202. £ Origen. contra Celſum, lib. i. p. 22. 3o. h Julian, apud Cyrill. 1. vi. p. 206. i Hierocles, apud Euſeb. p. 512. * The ſubſtance of thoſe arguments, which are uſually urged in defence 288 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony kingdom of the evil ſpirit, it is plain that they were wrought by the Holy Spirit of God, as the Apoſtles m and Jeſus himſelf aſſerted. To return then from this digreſſion, and pro- ceed.—There is one view, in which that diſplay of Power, whereby Jeſus verified the charaćter of The Mighty One, which John had aſcribed to him, may be repreſented, conſiſtently with the preſent ſubječt, namely, as far as his miracles either were prophetical, or gave him immediate occaſion to deliver prophecies. Let me there- fore be allowed to produce ſome few examples of this caſt. A miraculous draught of fiſhes ſtruck the diſ- ciple Peter with aſtoniſhment and diſmay. Upon ſeeing what the power of Jeſus could accom- pliſh, he dreaded what it might inflićt; “De- “partn from me, for I am a ſinful man, O Lord.” His divine Maſter immediately diſpelled his ter- ror, by a prophetical application of the miracle to him ; “Fear not, from henceforth thou ſhalt “ catch men.” He extended the ſame promiſe to other diſciples on a ſimilar occaſion ; “I will “ make you fiſhers of men.” His power, which defence of Chriſt's miracles, may be ſeen in Jortin's Rem. E. H. vol. ii. p. 7. and Serm. XII. vol. vii. * See Stillingfleet, O. S. b. ii. ch. Io. p. 352. Origen. contra Celſ. lib. ii. Chryſoſt. Hom. ad Matth. xii. 25. §r, ºr yet yivira, º ºpeſ, &s' ºr 3. Biſº ºváge, yiviral, & ºrgaywara Bož. m A&ts ii. I 1. * Luke v. 8. gave of John the Baptiſt. 289 gave ſucceſs to their preſent toil, would coope- rate with them as effectually, when they ſhould ſpread the net" of the Goſpel, and gather of every kind. - - He ſaid unto the man ſick of the palſy, “Thy “ſins be forgiven thee";” and proceeds to juſtify himſelf for aſſuming the divine prerogative of forgiving ſin. “ That ye may know and believe “ that the Son of man hath power on earth to “forgive fins, then ſaith he to the ſick of the “ palſy, Ariſe, take up thy bed, and go unto “thine houſe.” He ſeems to repreſent that mi- raculous cure as the ſign of a much greater, which he would afterwards accompliſh ; and by thus removing the pains of ſickneſs prophetically implies, that he would take away the q puniſh- ment of ſin. So alſo, upon giving fight to the eye, he alluded prophetically to his future diſper- ſion of that ſpiritual darkneſs, which had hitherto hung over the mind. “I am the light of the “world; I am come into this world that they “ which ſee not might ſee ".” And from theſe inſtances it ſeems not improbable, that upon healing other bodily infirmities he frequently re- preſented himſelf in a prophetical light, as the reſtorer of health s to the ſouls of men, which ° Matth. xiii. 47. P Matth. ix. 2. & Chryſoſt. Hom. 3 o. P. 344. Ed. Par. Tº; pair ºw &p.2%gºro, &pá- aswº razºgio, thy ré gégaro; cºw wortirai. * John ix. 5. 39. * Matth. ix. 1 2. U QITC 290 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony are often ſpiritually deaf, and dumb, and lame, and blind. - From the miracle of the loaves he takes occaſion to draw off the attention of the people from “the “ meat which periſheth,” and to direct it to that “ which endureth unto everlaſting life ‘;” and he prophetically points out his fleſh, as that “ living “bread,” which he would give for the life of the world. As he had provided temporal ſuſ- tenance by the loaves and fiſhes, ſo he promiſed eternal life through his body and blood ; and prophetically repreſented the preſent exerciſe of his power in diſpenſing the one, as the ſign and pledge of his future diſplay of it in procuring the other. The ſeventy" diſciples, at their miſſion, were not expreſsly inveſted with any other miraculous power than that of healing the ſick K. It ſeems however that they proceeded further than barely to the cure of bodily diſeaſes; for they “re- “turned again with joy, ſaying, Lord, even the “ devils are ſubject unto us through thy name.” From their expreſſion of joy and wonder Jeſus took immediate occaſion to repreſent their ſucceſs in a prophetical light; “I beheld Satan “like lightning fall from heaven.” His view went on from their paſt to their future efforts againſt the evil ſpirit; and he marked their preſent triumph over him, as the ſign and Prelude of * John vi. 27. * Luke X. I. * Luke v. 19. his of John the Baptiſt. 291 his final ruin. Accordingly, he delivered an im- mediate promiſe to them ; “ Behold, I give “ unto you power to tread on ſerpents and “ ſcorpions, and over all the power of the “enemy y.” Upon his miſſion of the Twelve to the cities of Iſrael, he had given them the ſame “ authority over all devils, and to cure “ diſeaſes”.” At the time of his conferring this power upon them, he had an evident view to their ſecond a miſſion; “ Go ye into all the “world, and preach the Goſpel to every crea- “ture.” And when he gave this command after his reſurrection, it was accompanied with his general promiſe to believers b, “In my name “ſhall they caſt out devils; they ſhall ſpeak “ with new tongues; they ſhall take up ſer- “pents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it “ſhall not hurt them : they ſhall lay hands on “ the fick, and they ſhall recover.” With what juſtice and truth had the Baptiſt aſcribed to him the attribute of Power It was his will, it was his name 6, that would d cooperate with the y IIgoſpotsſa. 30xtſ tº Asyóusvow stval—ºzºv roſyvy ºr à 32;govo, ixºdaxes pávoy, 2xx2 & rºy Tadway tº otzovºwns &razzº 27:2&ast, ºrz, p.2/ſ29s;z; tº 3.2%xov z27.2%ast, 22, wºvra. &xºnya. Troºze to izgizov, rzūrz eſpnks. Chryſoſtom. Hom. 42. ad Matth. xii. 25. pag. 447. Ed. Par. * Luke ix. I. * Grotius, ad Matth. x. 16. Mark xvi. 15. ° Of the accompliſhment of this promiſe, in its ſeveral clauſes, ſee Grotius on Mark xvi. I 5. ſq. c Matth. xii. 27. Mark ix. 38. d Tranſcribere in alium jus ſuum, et quod facere ſolus poſſis fra- giliſimae rei donare et participare faciendum, ſuper omnia ſitae eit U 2 poteſtatis, 292 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony faith of his followers; and nothing ſhould baffle or even withſtand that power, which he would confer upon them. Laſtly, That majcſtic declaration, “I am th “reſurre&tion and the life e,” placed his intended miracle of raiſing Lazarus from the dead in a light doubly prophetical; firſt, as the pledge of the general reſurrection, “He that believeth in “me, though he were dead, yet ſhall he live;”— and ſecondly, as the aſſurance of everlaſting life after death, “He that liveth and believeth in “me ſhall never die f.” He predicted reſtoration to life, and the inheritance of immortality to all thoſe who had faith in him, and thus appro- priated to himſelf the prophecy of the Baptiſt, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlaſting “life.” But he did more ; he repreſented him- ſelf as the very giver of that eternal life, which John had ſaid that the faithful ſhould have. In theſe wonders and ſigns of Jeſus, the pro- phecy of John, “He that cometh after me is “ mightier than I,” was fulfilled; and the pro- phetical applications, which Jeſus made of his mighty works, aſcertain his perfect inſight into the whole plan of redemption, and his diſtinct poteſtatis, continentiſgue ſub ſe omnium rerum cauſas, et rationum facultatumque naturas. Arnob. lib. i. p. 3 I.—Whitby on John xiv. I 2. * John xi. 25. ſq. * “He that liveth,” i.e. after his reſurre&tion,-4° and believeth in “ me,"—this is the condition ; for they who believe not will be de- livered up to the power of the ſecond death. f Ore- of John the Baptiſt. 293 foreknowledge of every ſucceeding diſplay of his power, till it ſhould have entirely accompliſhed the good pleaſure of the Father. The miracles themſelves, and the prophetical views in which Jeſus frequently repreſented them, ſuggeſt a very intereſting queſtion, which occurred to the Jews upon another occaſion ; “ Whence hath this “man this wiſdom, and theſe mighty works g?” The anſwer has been already given in the teſti- mony of the Baptiſt; “I ſaw the Spirit deſcend- “ing from heaven, and it abode upon him.” By this diſplay of ſpiritual gifts; of tranſcendent foreknowledge; of unlimited might; was mani- feſted the divine glory of the Spirit that dwelt in Jeſus. In a word, by this accumulation of prophecy and miracle, he appeared at once the Wiſdom and Power of God. SECTION II. Prophecies of Jeſus, relating to the charaćier, “Lamb of God,” aſcribed to him by the Bap- tiſt—general reflections upon them. LET us now proceed to another character at- tributed to him by the Baptiſt; “Behold the “Lamb of God.” When the miracles of Jeſus * Matth. xiii. 54. U 3 had 294 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony had ſo fully “manifeſted forth his glory,” both as to his office and origin, as to perſuade the diſciples that he was “Chriſt, the Son of the “living God h,” he began to lay before them, without i further reſerve, the bitter ſufferings, which he would undergo in the accompliſhment of his character, as Lamb of God. He frequently inculcated the great purpoſe of his paſſion; “ The Son of man came”—“ to “miniſter, and to give his life a ranſom for “ many k;” and this he did more explicitly than ever at the inſtitution of the Holy Communion ; “This is my blood of the New Teſtament, “ which is ſhed for many, for the remiſſion of “ ſins.” And, agreeably to the true and full im- port of theſe and other ſimilar intimations, he thus profeſſes in his prayer to the Father imme- diately before his death; “For their ſakes, I ſanc- “tify myſelf].” This ſeems to be a ſacrificial expreſſion, by which he devotes himſelf as an expiatory offering. 4. Indeed, that the Meſſiah would be ſacrificed m for the expiation of univerſal ſin, had been evi- dently foretold by the ancient prophets. They had particularly ſpecified many of the indignities * Matth. xiv. 33. John vi. 69. xxvi. 31. v. 36, 37. viii. 18. x. 25. 38. Aćts viii. 37. xiv. II. * Matt. xvi. 21. * Matt. xx. 28. John xvii. 19. See Levitic. xxii. 3. and comp. Heb. ii. 11. Whitby ad l. * Iſaiah xxxiii. Io. Dan. ix. 7. 26. to of John the Baptiſt. 295 to which he would be ſubjected, and perhaps n the very manner of death which he would un- dergo. But thoſe prophecies of Jeſus, which reſpected his ſufferings, appear nevertheleſs ori- ginal in him, not only from his delivering in particular detail what the prophets had repre- ſented in general and indefinite terms; but alſo from his enlarging their prophecies, and predićt- ing various things and circumſtances that would befall him, of which no certain traces occur in the Old Teſtament. Theſe predićtions then aſcer- tain his own prophetical character, agreeably to his inference; “I tell you before it come, that “when it is come to paſs ye may believe that “I am he o.” Thus he particularized not only the place", but alſo the day of his paſſion ; “ After two “ days is the feaſt of the paſſover, and the Son “ of man is betrayed to be crucified ".” At the time of his delivering this prophetical notice, the Jewiſh aſſembly had reſolved to offer no * Zechariah xii. Io. xiii. 6. Pſalm xxii. 18. This whole pſalm is admitted by the Jews to relate to the Meſfiah. Huet. Dem. Ev. prop. ix. pag. 607. Hebr. ii. 6. Voffius, Har. Ev. lib. ii. 7. $.48. obſerves, that there is no prophecy of Chriſt's crucifixion in the Old Teſta- II) ºn t. ° John xiii. 19. P Lulie xx. I 4. Eið, zaj, zºopárivas x2 & révoy, #Sa. itz:xx; a poºr- reaso., ; 22, 2%aoyts; (#w gapºria&vo;) &rizrewar. Chryſoſt. Hom. 68. pag. 67 I. Ed. Par. q Matt, xxvi. 2. * Matt. V. 5. U 4 violence 296 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony violence to him during the feſtival-week; and the deſign of betraying him to the chief prieſts had not, as it ſeems, yet been formed. Theſe cir- cumſtances render the prediction, that he ſhould ſuffer at the paſſover, the more ſignal and won- derful. After having frequently declared, that he ſhould be delivered into the hands of men, he pointed out one of the Twelve, as the betrayer of him, by a public and perſonal deſignation ; and with a view, as it ſeems, to the execution of his project, ſaid unto him at the inſtant, “What thou doeſt, do quickly ;” and immedi- ately on his going out, “Now,” he exclaimed, “ is the Son of man glorified.” Hence it ſeems a juſt inference, that the treacherous compact it- ſelf, and the deſign of his betrayer to fulfil it in that night, and the actual accompliſhment of his ſcheme in the courſe of it, were all fully and diſtinétly foreſeen. And even in the moment of its execution, when Judas at the head of a mul- titude drew near, that affecting queſtion, “Be- “trayeft thou the Son of man with a kiſs?” im- plied his knowledge of that ſign, whereby it had been agreed to ſingle him out from the diſciples. His aſſurance to the Eleven, “ All ye ſhall be “offended becauſe of me this night,” although correſpondent to a former prophecy", which he then cited and applied, was yet accompanied * Zechar. xiii. 7. with of John the Baptiſt. 207 with ſufficient evidences of his divine foreknow- ledge. For here alſo, as before, he enlarged the prophecy. He predićted the repeated denials of Peter, with a limitation as to time. This was entirely original; and the more cloſely this pre- diction is conſidered, the more wonderful will it appear. This abjuration, when foretold, was not only contingent, but expreſsly contrary to the re- ſolute determination of that diſciple’s mind. Yet three repetitions of it were diſtinctly predićted. The caſe alſo involves another ſtrong and very intereſting circumſtance. When Jeſus ſtood be- fore his judges', and was actually under exami- nation by the high-prieſt reſpecting his diſciples and his doctrine, the ſeveral replies of his fol- lower had not eſcaped him. He marked the moment, when the predićtion was fulfilled in all its parts; and then, “ the Lord turned, and “ looked upon Peter t,” who inſtantly “remem- “ bered the word that Jeſus had ſpoken.” “ He ſhall be delivered to the Gentiles,” was another original prophecy; and upon the com- pletion of it, the peculiar indignities which he was to ſuffer, and his crucifixion, all which he expreſsly foretold, abſolutely depended". He was condemned” by the Jews for blaſphemy, in calling himſelf the Son of God; and death by * John xviii. 19. t Luke xxii. 6 I. * See John xviii. 3 I, 32. * Matth. xxvi. 66, &c. ſtoning 298. On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ſtoning” was the puniſhment, which the Law pre- ſcribed. But, as it was “ not lawful for them “ to put any man to death *,” they led him away to the Roman governor"; and fearing that Pilate would not be diſpoſed to put him to death for blaſphemy againſt the God of Iſrael, they changed their ground of accuſation, and repreſented him as a mover of ſedition, and a ſtate criminal"; “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caeſar's “friend; whoſoever maketh himſelf a king, “ſpeaketh againſt Caeſar.” That charge ſub- jected Jeſus to the Julian law ‘, which was exe- cuted in the reign of Tiberius with the utmoſt rigour. Fear of the tyrant, and of the turbulent multitude which demanded that crucifixion, as preſcribed by the Roman law, might be inflićted y This they ačtually confeſs;–" Behold the man that is con- “ demned to be ſtoned.” Sanhedr. in Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. et Tal. on Aćts, pag. 634. * Either, becauſe according to their law crucifixion could not be inflićted; (ſee Le Clerc. Hamm. on John xviii. 31. Grot, on Gal. iii. 13.) which, nevertheleſs, and not ſtoning, they were reſolved that Jeſus ſhould undergo. Judaei non alio quam crucis ſupplicio Chriſtum affici volebant, tamen alio potuiſſent. Gregor. Nyſſ. I Orat. in Reſ. Chriſti.—Or elſe, on account of the feaſt, left they ſhould be defiled, Auguſtin. Tračtat. I 14, in Johan. Of the ſame opinion is Chryſoſtom. ap. Merilli Not. Philol. in Cren. Faſcic. - * Tacit. Ann. xv. 44. II.4. * Luke xxiii. 2. John vii. 12. * Senec. lib. iii. de Benef, cap. 26. Sueton. in Tiberio, cap. xxviii. I. Tacitus, Ann. iii. 38. —addito majeſtatis crimine, quod tum om- mium accuſationum complementum erat, ap. MeriHi. Not. Philol. 2d Johan. xix. I2. in Cren. Faſcic. OIA of John the Baptiſt. 200 on Jeſus, prevailed over the favourable diſpoſi- tion of the governor to him, and induced him to give ſentence, that it ſhould be as they required. Thus was Jeſus delivered up to the ſoldiers of Pilate, and was treated by them according to the cuſtoms" and law e of the Romans. The Jews, who had unjuſtly condemned him to death by their law, conſtrained the Gentiles to crucify him as unjuſtly by their own. St. Peterf after- wards upbraided the Jews with this aggravation of their guilt; “Him, by wicked hands, ye have “ crucified and ſlain.” Thus was Jeſus “ numbered with the tranſ- “greſſors”,” and “ poured out his ſoul unto “ death,” in full accompliſhment of his own aſ- ſurances as a prophet, and of his character as Lamb of God. And even in the midſt of un- ſpeakable agony upon the croſs he ſaw, as at one glance, the compaſs and extent of prophecy, and of the whole ſcheme and intention of the * Chriſt was ſcourged, Matth. xxvii. 26. Mark xv. 15. as being condemned to crucifixion. Florus alſo firſt ſcourged thoſe whom he afterwards crucified. Joſeph, Titus did the ſame. lib. vi. cap. 12. * Paul. lib. v. ſentent. tit. 22. Authores ſeditionum, et tumultus, concitato populo, pro qualitate conditionis, aut in crucem tolluntur —aut beſtiis ſubjīciuntur, aut in inſulam deportantur. The ſame puniſhment was inflićted upon others for ſedition, by Varus and Flo- rus, ſucceſſors of Pilate. Joſeph. de Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. 14. Merill. ubi ſupra. * A&ts i. 23. See Huet. Dem. Evang. 61. Locke on Rom. vi. 8. Gal. ii. 15. Benſ. Hiſt. Planting Ch. 81, 3 Iſai. liii. 12, Father 300 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Father concerning his ſufferings; and having firſt verified the prophecies in one only point, that yet remained to be fulfilled h, pronounced that all which was written in Scripture, or purpoſed by the Father, was accompliſhed; “It is finiſh- “ed,” he ſaid, and, bowing his head, he “gave “ up the ghoſt.” From the ſubſtance of theſe particulars it ap- pears, that all things, whether written in the an- cient prophecies or not, which ſhould come upon Jeſus, under every ſituation and conjuncture, were known to him without limitation. And ſuch appearances imply, that the human heart, in all its preſent and future movements, lay open to him. St. Marki attributes this know- ledge of the heart to “ his Spirit;” not to pro- phetical inſpiration merely, (for a prophet is not ſaid to know by his ſpirit,) but to his divine na- ture, which in Scripture" is called the Spirit; and through the Spirit he is ſaid to have offered up himſelf. Such appearances imply alſo, that the divine mind l, no leſs than the human, was by him diſ- tinétly and perfectly known ; and that, accord- ing to the witneſs of the Baptiſt and his own, he teſtified what he had heard and ſeen with the Father; whoſe words he ſpake; whom he knew, * John xix. 28. " ii. 8. Grot. ad loc. See John xvi. 30. Revel. ii. 23. * Heb. ix. 14. 1 Pet. iii. 18. ! I John v. 8. aS of John the Baptiſt. 3 O 1 as the Father knew him; and in whom he was, as the Father in him. S E C T I O N III. Prophecies of Jeſus more immediately relating to the charaćter, “Son of God,” aſcribed to him by the Baptiſt—that of raiſing himſelf from the dead—delivered with new and original cir- cumſtances, and proving him Son of God—the caſe the ſame as to the prophecy of his aſcen- Jion—reflection on both. - THESE predićtions of Jeſus related immedi- ately to his character, as Lamb of God ; he alſo delivered other prophecies, which chiefly re- ſpected that great attribute, Son of God, which the Baptiſt had likewiſe aſcribed to him. Of this kind was the prophecy of his riſing from the dead, by which he was, as the writer to the Hebrews ſtates, “ declared to be the Son “ of God with power.” He repreſented his re- ſurrection as a ſign to that generation ; and his prophecy of that miracle was not imparted to the diſciples only, but delivered at large, and ge- nerally known ". * Matth. xxvii. 63. Toregoing 302 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Foregoing prophets had ſtrongly implied", ra- ther than expreſsly named, the Meſfiah's reſur- rection from the dead. The terms in which Je- ſus predićted it were not only very direct and particular, but alſo included circumſtances, which either were entirely original, or, if in any de- gree alluded to in the Old Teſtament, were firſt brought out into a clear light by himſelf. Such inſtances, therefore, fully evince the reality of his own prophetical character. He refers to the caſe of the prophet Jonah", as exactly denoting the appointed time of his continuance in the grave; and, accordingly, his own reſurrection was limited by himſelf to the third day". He named not only the day of his reſurrection, but alſo the place of his future appearance; “After “I am riſen, I will go before you into Galilee";” and he ſeems to have appointed a mountain in that diſtriët, where he would ſhew himſelf unto the diſciples. This prophetical appointment was * Pſalm xvi. 10. Xi. Io. Iſaiah liii. 10,11. Aëtsiii. 1. 1 Pet. i. 11. * Matth. xii. 39, 4o. xvi. 4. Rabbini, Jonae typum pro reſur- re&tione mortuorum confirmanda citantes, allegant Oſea dićtum, vi. 2. quod ſane cum typo Jona, qui tres dies et tres noćtes integras in ceto detentus fuiſe legitur, non convenit. Ex quo apparet, etiam loca iſta, in quibus dicitur Chriſtum reſurre&turum, were: Tpsis hºipo;, ſic intelligenda effe, ut pºstc. ºpeſ; hºga; idem ſignificet, quod intra tres dies, five tertio poſt die. Epiſcop. Inſtit. Theol. 463. cap. 17. §. 4. * Matth. xvi. 21. xvii. 23. xx. 19. Mark ix. 31. x, 34. Luke ix. 22. X111. 32. * Matth. xxvi. 32. See Kidder, D. Meſ. Part III. p. 94. probably of John the Baptiſt. 3O3 probably intended to render his appearance after death more public and unqueſtionable; for moſt probably upon that mountain in Galileer he was ſeen by five hundred brethren at once. As theſe circumſtances, which Jeſus thus par- ticularly foretold, had not been indicated by any foregoing prophet, it ſeems a reaſonable conclu- fion, that he poſſeſſed an exact knowledge of all the purpoſes of God, which reſpected his reſur- rection, and his appearance to the diſciples after death ; and that this knowledge was entirely perſonal, and underived from any divine revela- tion that preceded his coming. So far then Jeſus has appeared a real prophet, from the predićtion which he delivered of his riſing again from the dead. But there is another original and extremely ſignal circumſtance at- tending his predićtion of that event, from which he muſt appear infinitely more than a prophet. He not only expreſsly foretold his reſurrection, but alſo repreſented it as an act of his own power; “Deſtroy this temple, and in three days “I will raiſe it up 8.” The Evangeliſt informs us, that “he ſpake of the temple of his body.” The ſacred writers ſpeak of the divinity of Jeſus in a ſtile of accommodation to the com- * Matth. xxviii. 16. Thoſe who doubted were not of the eleven, but of the reſt, who came thither to ſee him. See Lightfoot, I Cor. xv. 6. * John ii. 19, 21. IIl Oil 304 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony mon notions of the Jews. They believed that the divine preſence was in the tabernacle". Ac- cordingly, the Evangeliſts and Apoſtles repreſent the human nature of Jeſus as the temple and ta- bernacle" of his divinity, as the Son of God; taxåvarey sy %y, “He dwelt among us,” ſays St. John ; or, in a more cloſe and endearing ſenſe, he tabernacled in our nature; and, “In him “ dwelleth all the fulneſs of the Godhead bodi- “ly x,” ſays St. Paul; and hence he elſewhere calls the fleſh or humanity of Chriſt, zalazrāraa wa', the veil. Hence, then, may be underſtood his promiſe of raiſing his own body from the grave. As his aćtual reſurrection aſcertained his prophetical charaćter, becauſe he had foretold it; ſo alſo the completion of his expreſs promiſe to raiſe him- ſelf by his own power as ſtrongly implies, that there was in him ſomething beſides, and far above, a mortal nature. The Apoſtle Peter ac- cordingly affirms, “That he was put to death in “ the fleſh, but quickened by the Spirit".” The fleſh and the Spirit, in relation to Jeſus, are ex- t Levit. xxvi. 11, 12. Ezek. xxxvii. 26. 2 Cor. vi. 16. * "130, aſſrº, (a.a.p22) womašuevos way, tº #v air), º aw 25th, yvagić- p.svog, &s Os3; % Kūgos. Cyrill. ap. Petav. Dogm. Theol. lib. vii. c. 11. §. II. See Vitring. Obſ. Sacr. pag. I45. ſqq. The human nature of Chriſt is ſtiled by Epiphanius, 3.x: oy wangºparos. * Col. ii. 9, Tóris w, … iv i3% aduati' tº yºg hºrspoº tºo, irotºcoro arâuz. Paul. Emeſ. apud Petav, ibid. y Heb. x. 20. 2 I Pet. iii. 18. preſſions of John the Baptiſt. 3O 5 preſſions commonly uſed by the Apoſtles, to de- note by the firſt a of them his humanity, and by the laſt of them his divinity. Thus he is ſaid both to have offered himſelf, and to have been quickened, by the Spirit. There was in him that which could be ſacrificed and die; and there was in him that which offered up his mortal na- ture as a ſacrifice, and afterwards raiſed b it again to life. The former was the fleſh ; the latter was the “eternal Spirit.” Hence he is a quickening Spirit to the human nature, both in himſelf and in his brethren. As the Son “ had life in himſelf,” he was able, ac- cording to his prophecy and his promiſe, to build again that temple of his body, in which the fullneſs of the Godhead had dwelt; and as he “quickeneth whom he will,” and is truth it- ſelf, he will equally fulfill his univerſal prophecy and promiſe; “I am the reſurrection and the “ life.” When he was riſen from the dead, his diſci- ples were enabled to underſtand both his pro- phecy and promiſe relating to it. Then “they “believed the Scripture *,” becauſe the reſurrec- tion of their Lord was foretold therein ; and they believed “ the word which Jeſus had ſaid,” becauſe he had not only predicted it, but alſo promiſed perſonally to fulfill it. * Rom. i. 3. John i. 14. b It is no objection, that the Father raiſed him. See John v. 19. • John ii. 22. X Upon 306 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony Upon this point it may be ſufficient to make the following remark. The teſtimonies of the Baptiſt, that the Father gave not the Spirit to Jeſus by meaſure, and that he had a nature infi- nitely ſuperior to that in which he came after John, ſeem evidently verified by his reſurrection from the dead, when conſidered as the comple- tion of his promiſe. For when his human na- ture was broken and divided, and when he was not a perfect man, he yet perſonally exerted the divine power of the Spirit, to render his man- hood again entire. As merely a divine meſſen- ger he was dead; but he lived to ſuch “mighty “working” as Son of God. The prophecy of his aſcenſion, when the terms in which Jeſus delivered it are ſtrictly conſidered, will alſo be found to bear an immediate relation to his character of Son of God, and to verify the teſtimony of the Baptiſt that he came from hea- VCI). The aſcenſion of the Meſſiah to heaven had been alluded to by the prophets, and particularly by the Pſalmiſtd and Daniel. But Jeſus delivered this prophecy, not only in terms that were direct and not indefinite, which alone would evince the reality of his prophetical character; but alſo ac- companied it with circumſtances, which the pro- phecies of the Pſalmiſt and Daniel had not men- tioned, and to which of courſe they did not lead. * Pſalm lxviii. 18. Dan. vii. 13. He of John the Baptiſt. 307 He foretold his aſcenſion, as viſible to the diſ- ciples; “What and if ye ſhall ſee the Son of “man aſcend up where he was before * *” He marked this circumſtance, in conſequence of his own knowledge that the Father had purpoſed, and the Goſpel-ſcheme required, that they ſhould ſee him aſcend; and accordingly, “while they “ beheld, he was taken up, and a cloud received “ him out of their fight f.” The concluding words of his prophecy, “where “he was before,” are directly parallel to the teſtimony of John, that he came “from above;” and Jeſus ſpeaks elſewhere of his aſcenſion to heaven, as of his return to the Father ; “And “ now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine “own ſelf, with the glory which I had with “ thee before the world was".” The prophet Daniel, although he had ſpoken rather more largely than the Pſalmiſt, yet repreſented the Son of man as receiving only the glory of his mediatorial kingdom ; but Jeſus has enlarged the prophecy, and expreſsly referred to another glory, which he had with the Father, not only before the mediatorial kingdom began, but even before the world itſelf was created. It is this capital circumſtance, which no prophecy of the Meſſiah’s aſcenſion to heaven, except his own, had ever ſtated, which affords the ſtrongeſt evi- dence to his tranſcendent character, and juſtifies * John vi, 62. f Aćts i. 9. & John xvii. 5. X 2 the 308 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony the ſeveral attributes aſcribed to him by the Bap- tiſt, “ He was before me;” “ He that cometh “ from above;” “This is the Son of God.” How ſtrongly then did the glory of the God- head in Jeſus ſhine forth through the vail of his fleſh, in miracles of power, and in miracles of knowledge Juſt, therefore, as well as obvious, was the confeſſion of his diſciples; “Now are “we ſure that thou knoweſt all things;”—“By “ this we believe that thou cameft forth from “ God".” - SECTION IV. Prophecies of Jeſus that related to his charaćier, Son of God, and were parallel to prophecies of the Baptiſt—the prophecy, which Jeſus gave, of the return of the Holy Spirit to Iſrael, ſhewn to be original in ſeveral particulars—inference from it. THOSE prophecies of Jeſus, which we have hitherto conſidered had relation to characters which had been prophetically aſcribed to him by the Baptiſt. Let us now confider other prophe- cies of Jeſus, which not only had an immediate reference to the character, Son of God, which * John xvi. 30. had of John the Baptiſt. 300 had been attributed to him by John, but alſo were parallel to prophecies, which the Baptiſt himſelf had previouſly delivered. - The predićtion of the reſtoration of the Holy Spirit to the people of God not only verified the character of Jeſus as a prophet, but alſo aſcer- tained his high prerogative, as Son of God; and it was delivered in the terms both of a prophecy and a promiſe. - He uſes the following among other expreſ- ſions.—“I will pray the Father, and he ſhall “give you another Comforteri,” “even the Spi- “rit of truth,” “which is the Holy Ghoſt;" and he gave the diſciples an aſſurance, much more than prophetical, that the miſſion of the Spirit abſolutely depended upon his own aſcenſion to the Father; “ If I go not away, the Com- “forter will not come unto you k.” But he aſ- ſured them of even more than this : for he not only predićted the advent, but alſo promiſed the miſſion, of the Holy Ghoſt. “Behold, I “ ſend the promiſe of my Father upon you l;” “I will ſend him unto you"," “from the Fa- “ ther;” and he ſeems to call the advent of the Spirit his own coming, and his ſeeing the diſciples again ". He alſo gave a prophetical de- lineation of the offices of the IHoly Spirit; “He John xiv. I 6, &c. * John xvi. 7. | Luke xxiv. 49. * John xvi. 7. * John xiv. 18, 19, 28. Comp. Gal. iv. 6. Phil. i. 19. X 3 ** ſhall 310 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “ſhall teach you all things, and bring all things “ to your remembrance, whatſoever I have ſaid “unto you :” “He ſhall teſtify of me,” “ and “ he will ſhew you things to come: He ſhall “glorify me; for he ſhall receive of mine, and “ſhall ſhew it unto you".” And the true ground of his language, “He ſhall receive of mine,” he thus explicitly aſſigns; “All things that the Fa- “ ther hath are mine ; therefore ſaid I, That he “ſhall take of mine, and ſhall ſhew it unto you”.” In theſe paſſages the Holy Spirit is deſcribed as another divine agent in the work of redemption; as atteſting that Jeſus was gone to the Father; as glorifying him, by conferring on the Apoſtles all thoſe ſpiritual gifts, which would enable them to fulfill the commiſſion which Jeſus had given them to preach his Goſpel; and as abiding with his flock for ever. The parting addreſs of Jeſus to the diſciples, before his paſſion, from whence theſe expreſſions are taken, accumulates promiſe and prophecy to- gether; and from the general ſubſtance of that affecting diſcourſe, as far as it related to the miſ- ſion and offices of the Holy Spirit, the following reflections ſeem to be juſtly drawn. Jeſus, before his paſſion, as Lamb of God, per- fectly knew and defined the office of the Spirit, as well as his own, in accompliſhing the divine plan of human redemption; and accordingly pre- ° John xvi. 13, 14. P John xvi. I 5. dićted, of John the Baptiſt. 3 11 dićted, that, in completion of the promiſe of the Father and his own, the Holy Ghoſt would be ſent by both, to enable the diſciples to perfect that divine purpoſe of Goſpel-ſalvation", which he had already opened, and would thus enable them to carry on. The counſel of peace had been determined between the Father, and the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit; and their reſpective coopera- tions in the ſcheme of human redemption, as well as the regular ſteps and order, in which that ſcheme would unfold itſelf in all its parts, were known to Jeſus by perſonal intuition, as the Son of God, and therefore one of the divine parties to the ſcheme. Thus far we have ſeen, that the prophecy of the reſtoration of the Spirit was delivered by Jeſus, before his death as Lamb of God. After his reſurrection from the dead, he thus repeated the prophecy; “John truly baptized with water “ unto repentance; but ye ſhall be baptized with “ the Holy Ghoſt, not many days hence’.” This is an obvious repetition of that contraſt, which John had formerly put between the baptiſm of the Spirit, and the baptiſm of water; and the terms of this prophecy give ſufficient authority for conſidering the whole of the prediction, * The Goſpel is accordingly ſtiled, “the miniſtration of the Spi- “ rit.” 2 Cor. iii. 6. 8. * Zechariah vi. 13. * Aćts i. 5. X 4 which 31 2 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony which Jeſus gave of the return of the Holy Spi- rit to the people of God, as parallel to the pro- phecy of John; “He ſhall baptize, you with the “Holy Ghoſt.” In this paſſage Jeſus continues that particular ſtile of expreſſion, in which he had uſually delivered the ſame prophecy". The return of the Spirit had been charaćterized by the ancient prophets, and by the Baptiſt, under the ſymbol of water. It was therefore proper as well as ſtriking, that he, by whoſe Spirit the prophets had foretold the return of the Holy Ghoſt, ſhould employ, in delivering the ſame predićtion, the prophetical ſtile and language, eſpecially when he was ſo ſoon to pour out the Spirit upon believers. But, although the expreſſion of Jeſus, “Ye “ſhall be baptized with the Holy Ghoſt,” was conſonant to the language of John and the early prophets, yet his own prophecy was evidently original, ſince he enlarged the whole body of the prophecies reſpecting the return of the Spirit, by the addition of new and important circum- ſtances. The limitations, as to time and place, were both original.—“Ye ſhall be baptized with the “Holy Ghoſt not many days hence;”—“Tarry “ye in the city of Jeruſalem, until ye be endued “ with power from on high u.” In the laſt words * John iv. 13. vii. 38. Compare Iſaiah lviii. 7. Surenhuſ. Catal- lag. 358. " Luke xxiv. 49. of of John the Baptiſt. 3.13 of this command, another additional circum- fiance ſeems to be predicted. The prophecy of Joel, to which St. Peter referred”, as accom- pliſhed by the deſcent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecoſt, had not expreſsly mentioned either the power of working miracles, or of ſpeaking with other tongues, among the gifts of the Spirit. But Jeſus had already predićted, that both theſe powers ſhould be conferred upon his diſciples. “He that believeth on me, the works “ that I do ſhall he do alſo ; and greater works “ than theſe ſhall he do; becauſe I go to my Fa- “ ther y :”—“Theſe ſigns ſhall follow them that “believe; In my name ſhall they caſt out de- “ vils z; they ſhall ſpeak with new tonguesa.” He muſt therefore be underſtood to predićt both theſe ſpiritual gifts, in the general prophecy of the miſſion of the Holy Ghoſt, as a Spirit of power; and thereby to have made a great addi- tion to the parallel predićtion of the Baptiſt, as well as to the ancient prophecies reſpecting the return of the Spirit to Iſrael. If then the ſeveral circumſtances related by St. Luke in the A&s (namely, that the diſciples were baptized with the Holy Ghoſt, according to the promiſe of Jeſus, in the time and at the * A&ts i. 16. See Whitby, 1 John v. 6. X John xiv. I 2. * Mark xvi. 17. a The Apoſtle refers to this power as the teſtimony of Chriſt, I Cor. i. 5, , ºr:4,7, 24%, in every tongue, place, 314 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony place, which he had aſſigned; and with Fire, ac- cording to the prophecy of the Baptiſt;) be taken together into conſideration, the following con- cluſions ſeem to ſtand upon a fair foundation. As John, in predićting the effuſion of the Holy Ghoſt, with circumſtances before unrevealed, ap- peared an original prophet, ſo alſo Jeſus neceſſa- rily ſtands in the ſame light, ſince he enlarged the prophecy of John, and expreſsly particularized at what time, in what place, and with what mira- culous powers, the Spirit would return. The effuſion of the Spirit upon believers, either to conſecrate them to the miniſtry of the Goſpel, or to initiate them in the profeſſion of it, was as much the perſonal act of Jeſus", as baptizing the Meſſiah by water to his prophetical office had been the perſonal act of John. Laſtly, the actual advent of the Spirit, accord- ing to the prophecy and the promiſe of Jeſus, affords inconteſtable evidence", that he was, what the Baptiſt ſtiled him, and what he ſtiled him- ſelf, “the Son of God;” that he really aſcended and went back to the Father, “ ſat down on the “ right hand of the Majeſty on high “,” and that all power was given unto him, in heaven and earth. * The effuſion of the Holy Ghoſt is admitted to be one of the cha- raēteriſtics of the Meſfiah, by Abarb. on Iſaiah xi. 2. See Rom. v. I5, 17. Gal. iv. 6. Eph. iv. 7. Tillotſon, Serm. 144. * The Spirit is a witneſs to Chriſt, I Cor. i. 5. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. et Talm. vol. ii. 74o. 1 Tim, iii. 16. 1 John v. 6. * Heb. i. 3. viii. 1. SECTION of John the Baptiſt. 3 15 S E CT I O N V. Jeſus delivered prophecies of the converſion of the Gentiles, parallel to the prophecy of that event by John, but ſtill original—condućt of Jeſus, as a Teacher, compared with his lan- guage as a Prophet—reflections on that compa- riſon—further evidence that this prophecy of Jeſus was original—his promiſe that Peter ſhould have the Keys of his Kingdom conſi- dered. LET us now proceed to another prophecy of Jeſus. The converſion of the Gentiles, and their adoption to the inheritance of that bleſfing, which had been originally promiſed through the Meſſiah to all the families of the earth, as the true ſeed of Abraham, as it was a very impor- tant revolution in the ſpiritual ſtate of mankind, was accordingly predicted on many occaſions by the Son of God, to whom the Father f had pro- miſed the heathen for an inheritance, and the utmoſt parts of the earth for a poſſeſſion. It was formerly obſerved, that the caution given by the Baptiſt to his audience, “ Think * Gal. iii. 16. “He ſaith not, And to ſeeds, as of many; but as of “one ; And to thy ſeed, which is Chriſt.” Seeds muſt mean many, and not one.—Seed may mean one ; (comp. Gen. iv. 25.) and on that, as the true ſenſe of it, the Apoſtle ſeems to inſiſt. f Pſalm ii. 8, ‘‘ not 316 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony “ not to ſay within yourſelves, We have Abra- “ham to our father; for I ſay unto you, that “God is able, of theſe ſtones, to raiſe up chil- “dren unto Abraham,” really predićted the re- jećtion of Iſrael, and the adoption of the Gentiles to the inheritance of the patriarch's bleſſing ; and predićted it as fully and clearly, as that early and introdućtory ſtate of the Goſpel ſeemed to allow. That admonition of John may therefore be conſidered as parallel to all the prophecies which Jeſus delivered of the call of the Gentiles, and of the rejection of Iſrael. The following predićtion of Jeſus is very ſi- milar to the Baptiſt's prophetical admonition. “Many ſhall come from the eaſt and from the “ weſt, and ſhall ſit down with Abraham, Iſaac, “ and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven; but “ the children of the kingdom ſhall be caſt “ out into outer darkneſs.g.” This language ſeems to have been deſignedly aſſimilated to the tenor of the promiſe to Jacob. “ I am the Lord “God of Abraham thy father, and the God of “ Iſaac ;—thy ſeed ſhall be as the duſt of the “ earth, and thou ſhalt ſpread abroad to the weſt, “ and to the eaſt, and to the north, and to the “ ſouth; and in thee and in thy ſeed ſhall all the “families of the earth be bleſſed".” The Goſpel was thus preached then to Jacob, as before to & Matt. viii. II. * Geneſ. xxviii. 13, 14. i See Galat. iii. 8. Iſaac of John the Baptiſt. 31 7 Iſaac and Abraham ; and for that very reaſon, upon which the admiſſion of all the families of the earthk, together with the patriarchs, into the kingdom of heaven was now foretold by Jeſus; namely, becauſe “God would juſtify the hea- “ then through faith".” Jeſus predićts that the children of the kingdom ſhould alone be caſt out; “ The kingdom of God ſhall be taken “ from you, and given to a nation bringing forth “ the fruits thereof";” and, with an immediate view to the converſion of the heathen and the rejection of the Jews, he ſeems elſewhere to ſpeak in very explicit terms; “Other ſheep I “ have, which are not of this fold ; them alſo I “ muſt bring, and they ſhall hear my voice".” Theſe and other ſimilar declarations of Jeſus correſpond, not only to the above-mentioned predićtion of the Baptiſt, but alſo to many of the nobleſt prophecies in the Old Teſtament. But however conſonant theſe predićtions may ſeem to foregoing prophecy, they appear nevertheleſs not to have been derived from any divine reve- lation that preceded the coming of Jeſus, and therefore to aſcertain his own perfect knowledge of the whole counſel of God. * Comp. Luke xiii. 29. | Of which the Gentile Centurion gave ſo illuſtrious an example, that Chriſt took immediate occaſion from it to predićt the adoption of all others, like him, to the inheritance of Abraham's bleſfing. Matth. viii. I I. * Matt. xxi., 43. * John x. 16. See 1 Pet. ii. 25. This 318 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony This may poſſibly be placed in a clearer light, by comparing the conduct of Jeſus as a teacher of Iſrael, with his own predićtion as a prophet. The miſſion of Jeſus, as a teacher, was not of univerſal extent. “I am not ſent, he ſays, “ but unto the loſt ſheep of the houſe of Iſrael";” and the immediate benefits of his preſence upon earth were excluſively ſtiled by himſelf, “ the “ children's bread".” Conformably to this reſtric- tion in his own miniſtry, he limited" the firſt com- miſſion of the Twelve; “Go not into the way “ of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Sama- “ritans enter ye not; but go rather to the loſt “ſheep of the houſe of Iſrael'.” The limitation with reſpect to his own miſ- ſion ſeems at the firſt view to contradićt the de- clared purpoſe of his coming, “ That the world “ through him might be ſaved 5" and the pro- hibition which he laid upon his Apoſtles ap- pears at firſt ſight no leſs calculated rather to im- pede than to promote the accompliſhment of the ancient prophecies, and his own. A proper apprehenſion of the Goſpel-ſcheme, and of the juſt dependency of its parts upon each other, will indeed render it eaſy to perceive, that ° Matth. xv. 24. Comp. Rom. xv. 8. P Mark vii. 27. * Hence, when the Greeks, John xii. 22. deſired to ſee Jeſus, Philip declined leading them to him, and conſulted Andrew whether he ſhould do it. See Whitby ad 1. r Matth. x. 6. * John iii. 17. theſe of John the Baptiſt. 31 Q theſe apparent inconſiſtencies are not real. But the queſtion is not, whether they are real; but ſimply, whether the condućt of Jeſus, thus at once to predict the call of the Gentiles, and yet at the ſame time to delay the completion of it, and to undertake in his own perſon, and dele- gate to others, a miſſion to one people only, although he was an univerſal Saviour, could rea- ſonably be aſcribed to the prophecies, or to any known interpretation of them. According to all appearances, this conduct in the Meſſiah could not be explained or accounted for by any Jewiſh conſtruction of Scripture; and the pro- phetical writings, although ſufficient evidences of the divine miſſion of Jeſus, after his miniſtry had explained them, were nevertheleſs not diſ- tinct enough, to have afforded any adequate pre- conception of the regular ſteps and method by which he proceeded. If then the condućt of Jeſus, in the particulars above mentioned, be compared with ancient pro- phecy and with his own, it will probably appear that he acted under thoſe views, and made that diſpoſition of things in his work of redemption, which divine revelation, previous to his coming, had never diſcernibly marked, and to which of courſe it did not lead. He came to fulfill all things that were written of him ; but ſome, as Lamb of God, and many more, as Son of God, and Univerſal King. In theſe characters he diſ- criminated ; and referred to them ſeverally the acts 320 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony aćts and predictions, ſtrictly appropriated to it. He applied himſelf and ſent his diſciples, at firſt, to Iſrael only; for, ſince he had not been pro- miſed, as a teacher upon earth, to the world at large, he might in that character have one pecu- liar nation for his immediate object; but as his redemption was univerſal, he muſt, as a Saviour, have had for his ultimate object all mankind. It was not his miniſtry merely as a teacher upon earth, but the accompliſhment of his character as Lamb of God, that obtained the reconciliation of the world; and the Gentiles, who were afar off, were firſt to be made nigh by the blood of his croſs, and his paſſion was to precede" his glory in their admiſſion to his kingdom. In this ſcheme of univerſal redemption, both the vengeance and mercy of God were conſpicu- ouſly diſplayed. It was a diſpenſation of the greateſt ſeverity to the peculiar people, who fell and were rejected through unbelief; but it was a ſcheme of infinite goodneſs to thoſe who had been “ſtrangers to the covenants of promiſe,” and were adopted through faith. “Fill ye up “ then the meaſure of your fathers”,” may there- fore ſeem to be an addreſs doubly prophetical. It may ſeem to imply that the Jews, after the example of their fathers who had ſlain the pro- phets, would put Jeſus alſo to death; and that * Iſaiah liii. Io, I I, 12. Luke xiii. 2. Hebr. v. 9, 1o, ſq. * Matt. xxiii. 32. the of John the Baptiſt. 3 2 1 the caſting away of Iſrael, when incurred thereby, would bring on the reconciliation of the world. - - This was that myſtery of Chriſt which from the beginning of the world had been hid in God. The great and univerſal bleſfings, which would enſue upon the complete revelation of it, had in- deed been magnificently diſplayed by the prophets; who had alſo deſcribed the office and dignity of the Meſfiah, and predićted his ſufferings and glo- ry. But through the whole extent of their pro- phecies they ſeem rather to have dwelt upon the final iſſue and event of the ſcheme of redemp- tion, than to have ſtated the exact proceſs, by which the Redeemer would condućt it, and the particular and material differences in the ſtate of his church, before and after his paſſion, which would regulate his proceedings and predićtions. Foregoing revelation therefore could not be the ſource, from whence he drew ; the divine plan itſelf muſt have been his guide, in adjuſting the order and arrangement of the conſtituent and intermediate parts, and gradually filling up the whole. A regular and expanding ſyſtem had been ſettled in the divine mind ; of which only ſome partial and indiſtinét views, though fully ſufficient for the purpoſes intended, had been communicated to mankind. But Jeſus diſ- tinguiſhed the ſeveral means and parts from each other, and conducted their progreſs and gradual operation to the accompliſhment of the divine Y IIlerC16S, 322 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony mercies, in the appointed ſeaſon. What the prophets had accumulated in general and indefi- nite terms, the courſe of his miniſtry drew out and diſtributed in that regularity and order, in which it had been previouſly diſpoſed by the di- vine mind. By “the Spirit, which ſearcheth all “ things, yea, the deep things of God”,” he knew through what means, and at what time, the counſel of the Father would be finally com- pleted ; and accordingly ſaw where to forbear, and what to propheſy, and how far to limit or extend his views and operations. He predicted the call of the Gentiles, becauſe it was in the divine intention ; but he delayed that call, be- cauſe the peculiar church of the Jews was not diſſolved, and the preference of Iſrael to the Gentiles ſtill ſubſiſted. But when “in the body “ of his fleſh through death,” he had preſented the Gentiles “holy and unblameable, and unre- “ proveable in the fight of God’,” then the me- diatorial kingdom was begun; and then he de- livered an unlimited commiſſion to his Apoſtles; “All power is given ünto me in heaven and in “ earth; go ye therefore, and teach all nations’.” The Jews had crucified the Lord of glory, and thereby forfeited all privilege and preference in the divine bleſlings. The diſtinction between Jew and Gentile immediately expired; and both * I Cor, ii. Io. y Coloſſ. i. 22. * Matth, xxviii. 18, 19. Were of John the Baptiſł. 323 were admitted by the Father, upon the ſame con- ditions of repentance and faith, into the fellow- ſhip of his Son, who was now the univerſal Prince and Saviour. The body of the Jews, notwithſtanding, re- jected the Goſpel-offer of ſalvation. The conſe- quence of this aggravated inſult to the mercy of God is urged by the Apoſtle of the Gentiles; “It was neceſſary that the word of God ſhould “ firſt have been ſpoken to you : but ſeeing ye “ put it from you ',” “be it known therefore “ unto you, that the ſalvation of God is ſent “ unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear “ it b.” - The expreſſion of Jeſus, “Let the children “firſt be filled e,” was grounded upon his diſ- tinct foreknowledge of all theſe circumſtances, with reſpect both to their progreſs and final ef- fect in extending the bleſſing of Abraham to the Gentiles, and gathering them together with the Jews into one body", and giving acceſs to both by one Spirit unto the Father". In the great reſult of theſe circumſtances, all ſucceſſively tending to fulfill the ſalvation of the world, the riches of the divine mercy lay, undiſ- covered by all except the Son of God, in whom were hid “all the treaſures of wiſdom and know- “ ledge.” By his Spirit, as only-begotten Son * A&ts xiii. 46. b A&ts xxviii. 28. • Mark vii. 27. * Gal. iii. 14. * Epheſ. ii. 18. 324 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony of God, he entered into and fully comprehended the compaſs and depth of the counſel of peace between himſelf and the Father, and, being pur- poſely made in the likeneſs of man, directed and accompliſhed the ſcheme. The foregoing reflections, which have ariſen from a compariſon of the conduct of Jeſus as a teacher upon earth, with his own predićtion as a prophet, have tended to ſhew, that his prophecy of the call of the Gentiles had not been drawn from any foregoing revelation from God. Other circumſtances alſo, which Jeſus has added to the prophecy, have the ſame tendency to prove him a real and original prophet. Such are, the views, which he gave, of the prevalence of his Goſpel through the Roman empire, before the fall of Jeruſalem; and of its extending to the four winds of heaven, before his laſt coming. But, paſſing over theſe, I ſhall mention only one other evidence, that he aëted by a real and per- ſonal foreknowledge. This evidence ſeems to be contained in the words, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I “will build my church ;”—“ and I will give “ unto thee the keys of the kingdom of hea- “ven'.”—The remaining part of the paſſage ex- tends to all the Twelve ; but this extract ſeems excluſively reſtrained to Peter. As to the import of the firſt clauſe, “Thou art * Matt, xvi. 18, 19. “ Peter, of John the Baptiſt. 325 * Peter, and upon this rock I will build my “ church,” it may perhaps be determined from other paſſages of Scripture. The faithful, who are ſtiled the building * and the houſehold" of God, are ſaid to be built “upon the foundation “ of the Apoſtles and Prophets;” and the wall of the heavenly city is ſtated in the book of Re- velations to have twelve foundations, and in them “ the names of the twelve Apoſtles of the “Lamb'.” It ſhould ſeem then, that in whatſo- ever ſenſe the church would be founded upon Peter, in the ſame it would be built upon all the Twelve *. - The meaning of the ſubſequent clauſe ſeems alſo to be eaſily aſſignable. The Phariſees are reproached for ſhutting' up the kingdom of hea- ven ; and woe is denounced to the teachers of the Law, for having taken away “the key of “knowledge.” By parity of expreſſion, to lead men into the way of Chriſtian ſalvation would be properly called, to open" for them the king- g I Cor. iii. 9. * Eph. ii. Io. * Rev. xxi. 14. * Comp. Gal. ii. 9. James, Cephas, and John, who ſeemed to be pillars. | Matt. xxiii. 13. Luke xi. 52. m Chriſt ftiles himſelf “ the door,” and the gates of the Church are deſcribed, when once open, as open for ever. Iſaiah lx. II. —To open the door, denotes preaching the Goſpel. Iſaiah xxvi. 2. Aćts xiv. 27. I Cor. xvi. 9, 2 Cor. ii. 12. Coloſſ. iv. 3. Rev. iii. 8. . Y 3 dom 326 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony dom of heaven, and to give men the key of knowledge. To be the rock of the church, and to have the power" of the keys, ſcem therefore the com- mon attributes of the Apoſtolical office; but the words of St. Peter to the ſynod at Jeruſalem ſufficiently intimate the real difference, which ſubſiſted between himſelf and his colleagues, in both theſe reſpects. “Men and brethren, ye “know how that a good while ago God made “ choice among us", that the Gentiles by my “ mouth ſhould hear the word of the Goſpel P.” He juſtifies his preſent forwardneſs in adviſing what condućt they ſhould purſue toward the Gentiles, from the choice which God had made of him, to take the lead in opening the Goſpel to them; and it is generally conceived, that he alludes to theſe very words of Jeſus. According to this interpretation of the words of Jeſus to the diſciple Peter, they contain an original prophecy, that he ſhould firſt open the door of faith to the Gentiles, and ſo far become excluſively the foundation" of the Gentile church, * Non male forte huc conferas antiquum ritum tradendi clavem juxta pugillares apud Hebraeos in doćtorum ſuorum promotione; quae erte ad conceſſam docendi poteſtatem ſpe&tabat. Marckius in Ex- ercit. 5. Comp. Matth. xxiii. I 3. I Cor. iii. 5. iv. I. 2 Cor. iv. 5, V1. 4. ° E, hºw, i.e. had preferred him to the reſt. See Marckius, Ex- ercit, 5. P A&ts xv. 7. * The foundation, as a part of the building, may be ſaid to be firſt, of John the Baptiſt. 327 which Jeſus, the maſter-builder, would raiſe upon the common labours of the Twelve. And ac- cordingly Cornelius, who with his family formed the firſt-fruits of the Gentile church, was parti- cularly directed by an Angel, to ſend for Peter ; and that Apoſtle had already been inſtructed, by immediate' revelation from his Lord, to comply with the requeſt of Cornelius. St. Peter apparently conſiders this circum- ſtance in the light of a privilege; but it is pro- poſed here, ſimply, as original ; and, as it made a part of the prophecy of Jeſus, reſpecting the eſtabliſhment of his church among the Gentiles, it affords an obvious proof, that preceding reve- lations from heaven were no guides to him, but that his own views extended alike to every mi- nute and great particular in the counſel of Gods. firſt, even with reſpećt to priority of time only.—The word Sepfalzy ſeems compounded in this ſenſe by the Seventy. Eſdras vii. 9 – išips's was tºy dy4Gazºw rºw &rº B2&A&vº, he took the firſt ſtep in aſ- cending from Babylon. * See Benſon, Hiſt. of Plant. Chriſt. vol. i. pag. 234. * The more minute ſome of theſe things are in themſelves, the greater is the evidence of divine foreknowledge in the predićtion of them ; becauſe the conformity between the predićtion and the hiſtory is ſo much the more circumſtantial. Maclaurin on the Prophecies, pag, 63. Y 4 SECTION 328 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony S E. CT I O N VI. Prophecies of Jeſus that his Judicial Power ſhould be exerciſed ſpeedily upon Iſrael, and finally upon the whole world—theſe parallel to the predićtions of the Baptiſt, but ſhewn to be ori- ginal in Jeſus—reflection on theſe two pre- dićtions. BESIDEs the attribute of ruling, as King, over the Gentiles, another prerogative of a kingly cha- racter, namely, that of diſpenſing reward and puniſhment, was prophetically aſcribed to the Meſſiah by the Baptiſt, and was aſſumed by Jeſus himſelf. Two ſeveral exerciſes of that power are predićted by both ; one over Iſrael, the other over the world. The dreadful vengeance, which Jeſus would inflict upon Iſrael, for ſhedding the blood of the prophets and his own, is thus predićted by him- ſelf—“ He beheld the city, and wept over it, “ ſaying, If thou hadſt known, even thou, at “ leaſt in this thy day, the things which belong “ to thy peace; but now they are hid from thine “eyes;–for the days ſhall come upon thee, that “thine enemies ſhall caſt a trench about thee, “ and keep thee in on every fide, and ſhall lay “ thee even with the ground, and thy children “within thee, and they ſhall not leave in thee ** One of John the Baptiſt. 329 “one ſtone upon another, becauſe thou kneweſt “ not the time of thy viſitation.” This paſſage delivers in a ſhort but ſtriking de- tail what the Baptiſt referred to in ſummary terms; “Now the axe is laid unto the root of the “ trees;” and if all the prophetical parablest and diſcourſes of Jeſus, which bore an evident rela- tion to his approaching vengeance upon Iſrael, could be ſeen at one view, he would probably be found to have accumulated the ſeveral circum- ſtances, which lay diſperſed in the writings of preceding prophets. But from the many original circumſtances, which Jeſus has interwoven with his prophecy of the deſtruction of Jeruſalem, it appears evi- dent, that the divine purpoſe itſelf, and not barely antecedent revelation from God, was the ſource of his prophecy. Let us therefore conſider ſome few inſtances to this effect. Jeſus limited the completion of his judicial vengeance upon Iſrael to that generation ; and to that period of time in which the Goſpel ſhould have been preached throughout the Roman em- pire. When he informed his Apoſtles and fol- lowers that their ſuffering and death ſhould pre- cede it, he excepted the Evangeliſt John ", and * Matth. xxi. 33, 41. xxii. 2. 7. xxiii. 34, 35. Luke xix. I 2. u The words of Chriſt were conſidered as a prophecy by the diſci- ples. The extent of it was prolonged by them to the conſummation of all things; but the Evangeliſt himſelf over-rules that conſtrućtion, and limits the prophecy to the coming of Chriſt; and, as if to fix the 330 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony intimated that he ſhould ſurvive it. He had be- fore extended the ſame predićtion to others ; “There be ſome ſtanding here, which ſhall not “ taſte of death, till thcy ſec the Son of man “ coming in his kingdom ;” “This generation “ſhall not paſs, till all theſe things be fulfilled.” He not only particularized every bloody and ignominious circumſtance, that would attend and follow the ſiege and downfall of Jeruſalem, but alſo deſcribed the ſhort and dreadful period be- tween the delivery and the accompliſhment of his predićtion, and gave a prophetical hiſtory of that interval. The people of Iſrael are repre- ſented as falling from deep to deeper wickedneſs and woe. The coming of falſe Meſſiahs, to de- ceive them ; their ſlaughter of his Apoſtles and diſciples; wars and bloodſhed among nations and cities; hatred and treachery between parents and children “; famine, earthquake, peſtilence; are all expreſsly enumerated, as ſigns that the utter ruin of Iſrael drew near’. Theſe are called her “beginning of ſorrows,” 2.xn 29 voy: what then were they to be, when her full time was come * the ſenſe, and ſhew the accompliſhment of it, he ſubjoins, “ This is “ the diſciple, which teſtifieth of theſe things,” &c. As he wrote moſt probably after the deſtruction of Jeruſalem, he might, at the ſame time, record this prophecy, and atteſt its completion. * Whitby, Matth. xxiv. 9, 10, 11. Joſeph. de B. Jud. lib. iv. cap. Io, et 18. I Theſſ. ii. 4. X On the approach of the legions to the city, thoſe deſperate bands, which had filled the whole country with ſlaughter, were driven within - thc of John the Baptiſt. 3.31 He prophetically promiſed, that they who, ac- cording to the call of the Baptiſt and his own, had endeavoured to ſave themſelves from this wrath to come, by faith in him, ſhould then be the objects of divine protection. He promiſes, that for their ſakes theſe days of his vengeance ſhould be ſhortened? ; and with a particular ſoli- citude for them he pointed out the ſtanding a of the Roman eagles in the holy place, as their ap- pointed ſignal for immediate eſcape. However imminent the danger was, and however ſhort the time before the enemy returned ; yet the favourable moment might be, and was, ſeized the walls: ſo that many, in Judaea and Galilee, eſcaped from their füry, by the fiege being thus accelerated.—Before the ſiege, they had deſtroyed their own reſources of corn ; and by inteſtine ſlaughter haſtened and facilitated the triumph of their enemies. Theſe were ſome of the cauſes, that enabled many, who had fled to the barren mountains of Peraea, and others, even in the city itſelf, to ſupport themſelves there, till the end of theſe tribulations. * Matth. xxiv. 22. * Matth. xxiv. 25. The Roman ſtandard was vº, Lizºs, º ży 25+3 &rö; xpress, a little ſhrine, with a golden eagle in it. (Dion quoted by Hammond on Matth. xxiv. 28.) Grotius ſhews from Arrian, Suetonius, Tacitus, Juſtin, and Tertullian, that the Roman ſtandards exhibited the image of the Emperor, and were, on that account, adored by the Legions.—An Idol is called an abomination, I Kings xi. 5. 7. 2 Kings xxiii. 13. Jerem. vii. 30. xxxii. 34. Ezek. vii. 20. The Roman Ea- gles appeared before the city, under Ceſtius Gallus; but ſuddenly diſappeared, and ere long returned under Titus. In that interval, ac- cording to Joſephus, many eſcaped ; and, according to Eccleſiaſtical writers, many Chriſtians fled to Agrippa's dominions in Peraea, and took ſhelter thcre. with 332 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony with ſucceſs, by all thoſe who believed in Jeſus and his prophecy, and not in falſe Chriſts", and falſe prophets, who ſaid, “Peace and ſafety,” when ſudden deſiručiion was coming upon them. He predicted alſo the captivity of the Jews in all nations; and even the preſent ſtate of Jeruſa- lem, thus “ trodden down of the Gentiles ;” and he limited the captivity of the one, and the deſola- tion of the other, to that period, when the times of the Gentiles ſhall be fulfilled. The preſent condition of the Jews not only affords teſtimony to the accompliſhment of this prophecy, in that part of it which denounced the end of their ſtate ; but alſo gives the ſtrongeſt aſſurance of its future completion in the remaining part, which ſeems to promiſe, that Jeruſalem ſhall ceaſe to be trodden down of the Gentiles, and that Iſrael ſhall ſee Jeſus coming to her in his mercy, as he came then in his wrath, when the times of the Gentiles ſhall be fulfilled, and the Jews ſhall be diſpoſed to implore bleſfing upon him as the * The general character, which Joſephus applies to ſome of them, £zcińsićy 3 xzº, 2.Éreiss, ſhews the operation of principles, which the Goſpels aſcribe to the Jews, viz. that the time of the Meſfiah's ap- pearance was confeſſedly come, and that his leading objećt ſhould be the temporal deliverance of Iſrael. The ſame principles, that formed the ground of all theſe impoſtures, would tend to produce their ſuc- ceſs. Joſephus adds, that theſe falſe Chriſts ſhewed angeſ, ſº rápoto, ; whence it is evident, that a miraculous power was a credential of the true Meſfiah, though Maimonides affirms the contrary. Meſſiah, of John the Baptiſt. 33.3 Meſſiah, and ſay, “Bleſſed in the name of the ** Lord” be 3 #6%uevos C. Theſe are only ſome few of the many original circumſtances", with which Jeſus enlarged the views, which foregoing prophets had given of the deſtruction of Iſrael; but theſe ſeem ſufficient to ſhew, that the divine mind, and not antece- dent prophecy, had been the ſource from whence he drew, and that all the purpoſes both of the vengeance and mercy of God were equally known to him. The hiſtory of Joſephus, a Jewiſh prieſt, and an eyewitneſs of the tranſactions which he de- ſcribes, yields at once a commentary and a teſti- mony to this prophecy of Jeſus; and the more cloſely the predićtion and the detail of that hiſto- rian are compared together, the greater will be our aſtoniſhment, that the dire imprecation of the Jews, “ His blood be on us and on our chil- “dren,” ſhould be ſo ſignally and literally ful- filled. The prediction itſelf, in all its parts, if taken together with the accompliſhment, af- fords the ſtrongeſt evidence of the divine miſ- fion of Jeſus as a prophet; of his entire know- ledge of the will and purpoſes of the Father, & So I render the clauſe, wherever it occurs. * This capital prophecy has been frequently, and very diſtinétly, explained ; the following are among thoſe writers who have already diſcuſſed it. Chandler, Diff. annexed to Comm. on Joel. Grotius and Whitby, on Matth. xxiv. Newton, Diff. on Proph. vol. ii. pag. 24. Jortin, Rem. on Frcl. Hiſt, vol. i. Tillotſon, Serm, 184, ſq. aS 334 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony as Son of God; and of his Judicial power, as a king. This act of his regal authority over Iſrael ſeems to prefigure his final and univerſal judgment of the world; and as he came virtually, or by his power, in this firſt exerciſe of his judgment, and will come really and in perſon in the laſt, both of them are ſtiled his coming, in his kingdom e, in the clouds, and in his glory, and are called the ſign of the Son of man. Hence in the ſame capital prophecy he ſeems to ſpeak, in a primary ſenſe, of his approaching judgment upon Iſrael, and, in an ultimate ſenſe, of his laſt judgment of the world. The ſame obſervation was formerly applied to the prophetical words of the Baptiſt; “Whoſe fan is in his hand, and he will tho- “roughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat ‘ into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff “with unquenchable fire.” As the terms here uſed ſeem rather to denote a perſonal than a vir- tual advent, the paſſage appears principally to reſpect the laſt coming of the Meſſiah to judge the world ; and in that view it is parallel to the following prophecies of Jeſus. “The Son of “ man ſhall come in his glory, and all the holy & “ The deſiručtion of Iſrael ſeems to be called Chriſt's coming, John xxii. 2 I-In clouds, Revel. i. 7. This expreſſion does not ne- ceſſarily mean only a real and perſonal coming. Comp. 2 Sam. xxii. 8. See Lightfoot and Whitby on Matth. xxiv. 31.-In glory with an- gels, Matth. xxiv. 3o. It is ſtiled Chriſt's inthroning, Matth. xix. 28. Luke xxii. 30. See Lightfoot, Hor. H. et T. 461. 6 & angels ºf John the Baptiſł. 33.5 “angels with him ; then ſhall he ſit upon the “ throne of his glory: and before him ſhall be “gathered all nations, and he ſhall ſeparate them “one from another, as a ſhepherd divideth his “ſheep from the goats: and he ſhall ſet the ſheep “ on his right hand, but the goats on his left. “Then ſhall the king ſay unto them on his right “ hand, Come, ye bleſſed of my Father, inherit “ the kingdom prepared for you from the founda- “tion of the world.—Then ſhall he ſay alſo unto “ them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye “curſed, into everlaſting fire".” “The Son of “ man ſhall come in the glory of the Father, with his angels, and then ſhall he reward every “one according to his works.” He predicted the vengeance which he would inflict upon his enemies, and the ſafeguard which he would af- ford to his elect, in this life; he predićted alſo the endleſs miſery to which he will condemn the wicked, and the unſpeakable happineſs to which he will receive the righteous, in another. From the ſubſtance of what has been now ob- ſerved, it ſeems to be juſtly inferred ; that the divine glory of the Spirit in Jeſus was ſignally diſplayed in theſe predictions and promiſes; ſince he diſtinctly foreſaw, as a prophet, and perſonally promiſed to accompliſh, as Son of God, all the operations of his Judicial power, which were ap- pointed to eſtabliſh, to extend, to ſupport, and to 6 & & & Ç & * \ſatth, xxv. 3 I. finiſh, 336 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony finiſh, his mediatorial kingdom; and that, by the accompliſhment of theſe prophecies and promiſes, in ſo many reſpects, he has given ſufficient evi- dence that he is true and faithful, poſſeſſed of all knowledge and of all power, both as the author and the finiſher of our faith. SECTION VII. The prophecy of Jeſus that his Goſpel ſhould prevail—view of ſome impediments to its pre- valence—the Apoſtles, when Jeſus left them, wnderſtood not the Goſpel, had no language but their own, and were without the neceſſary for- titude—Jeſus overcame theſe obſtacles by the miſſion of the Holy Ghoſt. THE prophecies of Jeſus, which have been al- ready conſidered, were parallel to predićtions of John, and bore a direct relation, and by their ac- compliſhment gave evident teſtimony, to the cha- raēter of Jeſus, as Son of God. In order to ſhew that his prophecy of the eſtabliſhment and pre- valence of his kingdom in the world had the ſame relation, and by its completion gave the ſame atteſtation, to his character as Son of God, I propoſe to enter here upon ſome conſideration of that prophecy. * The of John the Baptiſt. 337 The Meſfiah and his kingdom are propheti- cally repreſented in the Old Teſtament" as gra- dually advancing from a ſmall and obſcure riſe to full ſize and brightneſs. The import of thoſe predictions ſeems to be prophetically implied in the words of the Baptiſt; “He muſt increaſe;” and in many paſſages parallel to this clauſe of John Jeſus foretold his own increaſe, and the eſtabliſhment of his kingdom, with circumſtances, which expreſſively denoted the unpromiſing be- ginning and final fulneſs of it. He compared it to a little leaven, by which the whole is lea- vened; and to the leaſt of all ſeeds i, which when it is grown is the greateſt among herbs, and be- cometh a tree; and when he encouraged the Apoſtles with this aſſurance, “Fear not, little “flock, it is your Father's good pleaſure to give “you the kingdom",” he ſeems to have ſpoken partly with a prophetical view to their future ſtruggles and ſucceſs in the miniſtry of his Goſ- pel. Indeed the prevalence of Chriſtianity, conſi- dered as the accompliſhment of the prophecy of Jeſus, affords ſtrong evidence of his divine cha- racter; but that evidence becomes ſtronger, upon conſidering that the prevalence of his Goſpel muſt be aſcribed immediately to himſelf. In the * Pſalm cxviii. 22. Iſaiah xlix. 7. liii. 2, &c. Daniel ii. 34, 33. * Matth. xiii. 32, 33. * Luke xii. 32. compared with ver, 4 I, 42. Z, firſt 338 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony firſt of theſe two lights it diſplays the incom- parable foreknowledge of its author, while he miniſtered upon earth ; and in the laſt it aſcer- tains that divine infinitude of perſonal power, with which he reigneth in heaven. I ſhall therefore endeavour to ſhew, that by fulfilling perſonally from heaven the promiſes which he had made on earth, he adjuſted the means of eſtabliſhing his kingdom to the end propoſed, and removed every impediment to the completion of his prophecy. With this view it may be obſerved, that the Apoſtles of Jeſus, at the time of his going away from them, underſtood not the ſpiritual character and univerſality of his kingdom ; and were un- provided with many principal requiſites' for the ſucceſsful diſcharge of their office. This was plainly confeſſed by their Lord before his death; “I have yet many things to ſay unto you, but “ye cannot bear them now".” Theſe things would moſt probably, at that time, either have claſhed with their ruling prejudices, or have quite overpowered their ſtrength of mind. Jeſus then indeed aſſigned a future remedy for theſe defi- * Compare Matth. xxviii. 20. “Teaching them to obſerve all “things, whatſoever I have commanded you," with John xiv. 26. “He ſhall bring all things to your remembrance, whatſoever I have “ ſaid unto you.” If the Twelve were already able to teach what- foever Chriſt härl commanded, the Spirit was not wanted, to remind them of whatföever He had ſaid unto them. * John xvi. 12. See Whitby ad 1. ciencies; of John the Baptiſt. 33 Q ciencies; but he thereby implied that they would ſtill ſubſiſt, until the remedy ſhould be given; and accordingly they appear to have ſubſiſted at the time of his aſcenſion n. Again; although the miſſion of the Twelve was of univerſal extent, yet they, as being all Galilaeans, were obviouſly unable to propoſe the Goſpel, ſuppoſing that they had completely un- derſtood it, to any but Jews, and not even to them without very conſiderable diſadvantage. Unſkilled, as it ſeems, in the original text 9, and even the Greek verſion", of the prophecies, they could not confirm the Chriſtian faith by appeal- ing to the Jewiſh Scriptures. The firſt of theſe impediments rendered them utterly unable to “ diſciple all nations,” and the laſt greatly diſ- qualified them for preaching with ſucceſs even to their own ". It may be further obſerved, that their Apoſto- lical warfare" indiſpenſably required far greater fortitude of mind, than they, according to pre- vious appearances, naturally poſſeſſed. After having heard the doctrines, and ſeen the miracles n A&ts i. 7. * See Lightfoot, vol. i. 285. P Which the Greek of the New Teſtament much follows. Light- foot, Miſcell. vol. i. Ioo 5. * To Jews the argument from prophecy would be particularly awakening. Hence, in their addreſſes to their countrymen, the Apo- files commonly uſed it. r 1 Tim. i. 18. Z 2 of 340 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony of Jeſus, after having preached in the cities of Iſrael, they had all forſaken him, and Peter had thrice denied him. Beſides; it was probable that their natural fears would be extremely aggravated by the ex- preſs prophecies of Jeſus; “Behold, I ſend you “ forth as lambs among wolves *;” “Ye ſhall be “hated of all men for my name's ſake";” “They “ſhall deliver you up to be afflicted, and ſhall “kill you u.” That part of the prediction, which related to St. Peter ſingly, was thus explained to him ; “When thou waſt young, thou girdedſt “ thyſelf, and walkedſt whither thou wouldeſt; “ but when thou ſhalt be old, thou ſhalt ſtretch “forth thy hands, and another ſhall gird thee, “ and carry thee whither thou wouldeſt not; “This he ſpake,” the Evangeliſt adds, “ ſigni- “fying by what death he ſhould glorify Gods;” and it is generally underſtood to imply cruci- fixion y. The feelings and wiſhes of the Twelve * Luke x, 3. * Matth. x. 22. Luke xxiv. 9. * Matth. x. 17. * John xxi. 18, 19. y See Grot. and Wolf, on John xxi. 18. “Petrus ab altero cingi- “tur, cum cruci adſtringitur." Tertull. Scorpiaco. The uſe of his hands, and of his feet, ſhould be taken from him. This would not charaćterize any other death, but that of crucifixion; and it is elſe- where charaćterized particularly by the ſuffering of the hands and the feet; “They pierced my hands and my feet,” Pſalm xxii. 16. The Apoſtle himſelf ſeems to allude to this prophecy of his Lord, 2. Pet. i. 13, 14. and it was accompliſhed ſoon after, in the perſecu- tion raiſed by Nero. would of John the Baptiſt. 341 would greatly add to the diſtreſsful effect of theſe predictions upon them. Full of hope to enjoy the glory of this world in the kingdom of their Iord, they were not likely to receive his intima- tion of their future ſufferings and violent death ', without extreme diſappointment, aggravated by the utmoſt terror. And hence it may be ob- ſerved, that if Jeſus be ſuppoſed the author of impoſture, his conduct in ruining the favourite hope of his adherents, even before they under- ſtood that faith which he deſigned them to pro- pagate, and in ſhewing them a world prepared to perſecute and deſtroy them for his name's ſake", as it would certainly tend to fruſtrate his own deſign, muſt ſeem entirely irreconcileable with every known principle of human nature. There were no aſſignable means of overcoming the natural effect of his predićtion upon them, except a commanding ſenſe of duty, founded upon their conviction of the real truth of the Goſpel, and animated by the promiſe of its au- thor to ſupport them. Beſides, his direction to the diſciples not to meditate” previouſly what they ſhould anſwer, ſtill further aggravated the eaſe. He gave them a forefight of danger, yet forbad them to prepare defence ; and he ap- parently abandoned them to that perſecution, * Matth. xxiv. 9. Mark xiii. 9. Luke xxi. 12, 16. a Hence Tertullian calls the perſecution of the Chriſtians, “ nomi- “nis praelium.” See Newton on the Prophecies, vol. ii. pag. 253. * Luke xxi. 14. Z 3 under 342 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony under which he informed them at the ſame time they would aſſuredly ſink. According to this repreſentation, Jeſus left his Apoſties without that knowledge of his Goſpel, which their office neceſſarily required; and, if they had really underſtood it, without the power of propoſing it to any but Jews, although they were ſent to people of all tongues; and not even to Jews, without great diſadvantage; and beſides, without fortitude equal to the undertaking. No adequate cauſes of the accompliſhment of the prophecies, that Jeſus muſt increaſe, and the kingdom be given to his “little flock,” ſeem therefore to have exiſted at the time of his aſ- cenſion. Yet, if, as St. Luke certifies , the Apoſtles ac- tually entered upon the miniſtry of the Goſpel not many days after the aſcenſion of their Maſter, one of the two following points will neceſſarily be true; either that they exerciſed their office under ſuch ſignal deficiencies, or that theſe im- pediments were in the mean while removed by the power of their Lord, according to his pro- miſe. The firſt of theſe caſes ſcarcely ſeems defenſi- ble; for then the fact would be, that a ſyſtem of * Aćts i. 14. That the book of the A&ts of the Apoſtles was writ- ten by St. Luke, and contains a true hiſtory, hath been ſhewn, from various external and internal teſtimonies, by Benſon, in a particular Diſſertation, at the end of Hiſt. of the firſt Planting of the Chriſtian Religion, vol. ii. pag. 318. Goſpel- of John the Baptiſt. 343 Goſpel-faith was at firſt clearly propoſed by per- ſons, who did not themſelves juſtly comprehend it ; and that the moſt implacable perſecution, and even the utmoſt bitterneſs of death, were voluntarily incurred by men, who were natu- rally diſpoſed to ſhrink even from an appearance of danger. This difficulty can be avoided only by ſup- poſing, that their deficiencies were a&tually reme- died before the commencement of their miniſtry. But the interval between the aſcenſion of Jeſus and their publication of his Goſpel was of incon- ſiderable length; and the very firſt view which they gave of it was comprehenſive and clear; and it was, beſides, propoſed with fervency and “ much aſſurance d.” An improvement ſo great and ſudden, both in their views of the Chriſtian ſcheme, and in their ſtrength of mind, cannot reaſonably be aſcribed to any natural powers of their own. According to appearances, then, that increaſe of Jeſus and of his kingdom, which had been foretold by the Baptiſt and himſelf, could not have taken place, if there had been no comple- tion of that prophecy, which Jeſus had delivered in his laſt words to the diſciples; “Ye ſhall re- “ ceive power, after that the Holy Ghoſt is come “ upon yout.” He had before predićted the ad- d 1 Theſſ. i. 5. - * Summam hic proponit tot ſermonum Apoſtolicorum, quos hic Z 4 liber 344 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony vent, and had promiſed the miſſion of that divine agent in the work of redemption, and had di- rected the Apoſtles to wait at Jeruſalem for his coming , ſince it was his diſtinči and proper office to remove thoſe very incapacities, under which he himſelf ſhould leave them ſtill to la- bour. “Behold, I ſend the promiſe of my Fa- “ ther upon you ;”—“When he, the Spirit of “truth, is come, he will guide you into all “truth;”—“He ſhall teach you all things, and “bring all things to your remembrance, what- “ſoever I have ſaid unto you.” Jeſus, by actually fulfilling this prophecy and promiſe, baptized them with the Holy Ghoſt; and having himſelf the Spirit without meaſure, he gave unto them of his own fullneſs g. The Holy Ghoſt, when he deſcended, accompliſhed hish offices in the divine ſcheme of redemption, by his influence upon the Apoſtles, as the Spirit of truth, and the Spirit of power; and the evi- dence of his actual deſcent upon them immedi- ately and publicly appeared. Endued by him, as the Spirit of truth, with liber (A&t. Apoſt.) exhibebit. Confer Marc. xvi. 20. Grot, ad A&ts i. 7. * A&ts i. 4. * John i. 16. Eph. ix. 13. * John xvi. 13. 'Exiſto; tº IIvetºz, He, that Spirit of truth. Clarke, Scrip. Doct. of the Trinity, p. 202. Comp. Eph. i. 13, 14, “That “ holy Spirit of promiſe, which (3;, who) is the earneſt,” &c. “ the of John the Baptiſł. 345. -----. “ the word of wiſdom',” and enriched by him, as the Spirit of power, with “all utterance,” the Apoſtles were at once enabled to communicate to men of every tongue all the doctrines which Jeſus had already delivered, and whatever elſe came to them then or afterwards by revelation from God. - Renewed too by him, as the Spirit of power, in the temper of their minds, out of weakneſs they were made ſtrong, from being fearful they were become bold, and continued to the end exactly the reverſe of what they had been in the beginning. That Peter, in particular, could maintain the exerciſe of his miniſtry through a life of continual hardſhip and ſtruggle, under the certainty of ending it like his Lord by violence and under torture, was the effect of the former interceſſion of Jeſus that the faith of this diſci- i.e. a comprehenſive view of the doćtrines and myſteries of the Chriſtian religion. See I Cor. i. 24. ii. 6. Epheſ. i. 17. St. Paul is ſaid by St. Peter (2 Ep. iii. 15.) to have written his epiſtles, ac- cording to “the wiſdom given unto him." In the catalogue of ſpiritual gifts, I Cor. xii. 8, the “word of wiſdom” ſtands firſt ; and in the liſt of thoſe, who received the ſeveral gifts of the Spirit, the Apoſtles are placed firſt, (28, 29.) ſo that the Apoſtles only ſeem to have received the “word of wiſdom,” that is, were enabled to ſpeak by revelation, I Cor. xiv. 6. Superior prophets and evangeliſts learned from the Apoſtles, 2 Tim. i. 2. what they learned from im- mediate revelation. Thus alſo the Apoſtle Paul received not the Goſpel from man, but immediately from Jeſus Chriſt. I Cor. xv. 3. Galat. i. 1 1, 12, 19.-See Benſon, Hiſt, of Planting C. R. vol. i. pag. 49, 4 I. and the note at pag, 182. ple 346 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony ple might not fail k, and of his Maſter's accom- pliſhment of his promiſe, which enabled that Apoſtle to ſpeak “the word of God with bold- “ ineſs .” Inveſted, beſides, by the Holy Ghoſt, as the Spirit of power, with a miraculous power of the largeſt extent, the Apoſtles “came behind in no “gift;” but, more highly favoured than former prophets, and in ſome degree reſembling their Lord himſelf, they uniformly diſplayed the fulleſt evidences of a divine miſſion, the exerciſe of ſpi- ritual gifts in their own perſons, and the com- munication of them unto others m, diſcerning of ſpirits, prophecy, and miracles". Their manifold incapacities for preaching the Goſpel would therefore, as it ſeems, unavoidably have remained in all their former force, if Jeſus had not ſent to them, according to his promiſe, “ the Spirit of truth, which is the Holy Ghoſt.” He it was, who brought the Goſpel down from heaven, and ſhined in their hearts", to give “the “light of the knowledge of the glory of God, in “ the face of Jeſus Chriſt".” As they were but “earthen veſſels,” unfit for the ſpiritual uſe to * Luke xxii. 31. * A&ts iv. 31. * Aćts viii. 14. * Aéls v. 3. 9. viii. 21. 23. xiii. Io. xiv. 9. * I Thefſ. i. 5. I Cor. ii. 7, Io. 1 Pet. i. 12. P 2 Cor. iv. 6. vii. 8. which of John the Baptiſt. 347 which they were appointed ; the excellency of the power, which was treaſured up in them, the more plainly appeared to be of God. But even after this effuſion of the Spirit upon them, they were not, as yet, guided “ into all “ truth.” They were ſtill permitted to remain unacquainted" with the divine purpoſe of extend- ing ſalvation to the Gentiles; ſo that, even in this capital point, they could not proceed to the extent of their commiſſion, without farther illu- mination. Jeſus therefore perſonally inſtructed St. Peter in the caſe of the Gentile Cornelius. From this and many ſimilar inſtances it appears, that as the Twelve could not have opened their miniſtry without an effuſion of the divine Spirit upon them, ſo neither could they have proceeded in the diſcharge of it, without repeated inſpiration from God. * See Grot. ad Aét. Apoſtol. ii. 39.—Benſon, Hiſt, of Planting the C. R. vol. ii. pag. 23 o. SECTION 348 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony S E CT I O N VIII. Another impediment to the prevalence of the Gaſ- pel lay in the continuance of the Law—Jeſus zemoved it by his Judicial ſubverſion of the State of Iſrael. THE continuance of the Law was another great impediment to the increaſe of Jeſus, and to the growth of his kingdom. Two divine diſ- penſations were ſubſiſting at once in rivalſhip to each other. From this competition the minds of the Jews took different turns, but all unfa- vourable to the Goſpel. Excluſive zeal for the Law exaſperated the greater part of that people againſt Chriſtianity", and particularly againſt thoſe who taught it. All their craft, all their power, were exerted to check and overthrow it". They ſhed the blood of the Apoſtles and converts of Jeſus, not perceiving in the mean while that they added to the evidence of his divine miſſion, by * This was the chief ground of that oppoſition to the Apoſtles, which their contemporary Cerinthus gave. See Epiphanius, quoted by Whitby, ad Coloſſ. ii. Io. and Conſtit. Apoſtol. lib. vi. Io. * I. By an eſtabliſhed prayer againſt Chriſtians.—2. By emiſſaries, to decry the Goſpel every where. Aćts xix. 13. See Lightfoot on Aćts, p. 289.—Of Jewiſh oppoſition to the Apoſtles, ſee A&ts xiii. 45. xvii. 5. Rom, xv. 31. 1 Thefſ. ii. 14.—James ſuffered at Jeruſalem, Aćts xii. 2. Joſeph. Antiq. 1. xx. cap. 8.—Antipas at Pergamus, Revel. ii. 12, 13–Peter at Babylon. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. et Talm. 24. Is - thus of John the Baptiſt. 34) thus accompliſhing his prophecies. Others of that nation yielded indeed to the evidence of the Goſpel, but without any relaxation of their zeal for the Law. They ſubverted the fundamental principle of Chriſtianity, by aſſociating Judaiſm with it, and by obſtinately ſhutting the door of faith againſt the Gentiles". Others of them who embraced the Goſpel, and ſubmitted ſo far to the ſpirit of it as not to decline all communion with the Gentiles, yet rigorouſly contended for im- poſing the yoke of the Law upon them, and pro- bably, when the Apoſtolical Council at Jeruſa- lem decided againſt them, renounced the faith of Chriſt, and fell back to the Law ". All theſe purſued their ſeveral principles with bitter hoſ- tility to the true diſciples of Jeſus, and virtually laboured to ſubvert his kingdom *. Every effort of Apoſtolical vigilance and induſtry, and all the authority of an Apoſtolical ſynod, would cer- tainly have failed in ſupporting the “little flock” of Jeſus againſt this weight of unrelenting and ſanguinary oppoſition, if it had not been “the “Father's good pleaſure to give them the king- “ dom.” The removal of this great obſtacle to the in- * A&ts xi. 3. xv. 1, &c. * Of the apoſtaſy of many, ſee 2 Theſſ. ii. 3. Gal. iii. 2. 2 Tim. i. 15. Comp. Matth. xxiv. 12. * In the A&ts, and in the Epiſtles, eſpecially thoſe of St. Paul, many evidences occur, that theſe ſeveral principles prevailed among the Jews. See Aćts xxi. 21. Rom. ii. 17–See Gal. ii. 4, and Whitby on Gal. iii. 4. and on James i. 19. creaſe 350 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony creaſe of Jeſus and of his kingdom depended upon the accompliſhment of that Judicial ven- geance of his own, which he had denounced againſt the city, temple, and people of Iſrael, re- preſenting the ſhaking and downfall of their ſtate, by the convulſion and ruin of nature”. By this ſignal ačt of his judicial authority he had pro- miſed to come and relieve his church *, and to make a way for the eſtabliſhment and increaſe of his own kingdom. Hence it ſeems frequently repreſented in the Apoſtolical Epiſtlesa as the ſignal teſt, by which the true ſervants and the real kingdom of Jeſus would be known; and by which the conteſt between the two rival diſpen- ſations of the Law and the Goſpel would be de- termined in favour of the latter. As this pro- phecy was generally diſperſed throughout the Roman empire before the fall of Jeruſalem, the minds of men were awakened to expect the ac- compliſhment of it, as an eventual teſtimony for or againſt Jeſus and his Goſpel. That the prophecy was literally accompliſhed in the fall of the city, a ſhort but ſtriking evi- dence is given in the complaint of the Jew Eleazar; “Where is that city, whoſe inmate, as “we believed, was God From the foundations * Comp. Iſaiah xiii. 1 o. Ezek. xxxii. 7, 8. Joel. ii. 31. iii. I5. * John xxi. 22. * I Pet. iv. 7. Phil. iv. 5. 1 Theſſ. v. 2. Heb. x. 25. James v. 9. 6 & it of John the Baptiſt. 351 “it is rooted up ; and one only monument of it “ is left, the camp of thoſe who deſtroyed it, ſtill “ pitched on its remains”.” An overthrow no leſs complete befell the tem- ple. What the lingering flames, though madly haſtened by the Jews themſelves, had left un- done, the Roman ploughſhare accompliſhed ‘; it profaned and utterly defaced the holy place. The ſacred veſſels were depoſited in the temple of peace at Rome 4; and the tribute e, uſually paid by the Jews to the God of Iſrael, was transferred to Jupiter of the Capitol, to whom ere long a temple was erected, on or near the ſite of the houſe of Jehovahf. Theſe were indeed the days of wrath upon this people, and all things that were written againſt them were accompliſhed. They were thrown out as a carcaſe, and the eagles were gathered together to devour it. The ſlain were innumerable; and they who ſurvived were ei- ther ſold to ſlavery, or devoted to the ſanguinary b Joſeph. de Bell. Jud. lib, vii. cap. 8. Ed. Hudſ. See Newton, on Proph. vol. ii. pag. 3 I 5. * See Lightfoot, Whitby, and Wetſtein on Luke xix. 44. * Joſeph. de Bell. Jud. lib. vii. 24. * Joſeph. lib. vii. 27. (bópoy 3, 3783%ráſ’ &c., Iaºzſong in Gaas 3% 2}ax- p.28, #22:cy ºffivaz, 22 way to its tº xarálóalo, pipew, &azip agóripoy its + #y 'Isroaoxćpºols við, avyāleāāy.—Xiphilin. ad Dion. Caſſ. lib. lxvi. init. Kał &r ixiſcov 33;&xpo, irºz$n tê; ra. 7&rgia. airá, 3.9% "regiçãºortz; t; Añº 22+ 3 +G' cºro?ipew. * Dion. Caſſ. Hiſt. lib. lxix. p. 793. Ed. Leunclav. Hanov. 1606. Newton, on Proph. Vol. ii. Pag. 3 17. combats 352 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony combats of the theatre g, or reſerved for the tri- umphal proceſſion of the conqueror, in which the Law of the Jews cloſed the trainh. From that time to this, their calamities have exceeded any that ever befell them as a nation before. They were together in Goſhen, together in Babylon; Moſes was ſent to them, during their bondage in Egypt; and Ezekiel and Daniel propheſied, under their captivity in Babylon. But they are ſeparated now, and deſtitute of all divine communication, and entirely diſabled from any further obſerv- ance of their ceremonial worſhip, conſiſtently with the laws of that diſpenſation i, to which they reſolutely adhere. They ſeem to be held up to the eyes of all nations k, as a ſignal mo- nument of the vengeance of Jeſus now; and to be, as we hope, reſerved for the final diſplay of his mercy. ** This coming of Jeſus in his kingdom, to fulfill his own denunciation of woe to the temple, the city, and people of Iſrael, broke the power of the Jews, and relieved his “ little flock ;” and thereby he ſubverted the Law, and left his Goſpel to ſtand without a competitor, as a divine diſ- & Joſephus, de Bell. Jud. lib. vi. 9. §. 2, 3. et lib. vii, cap. ii. §. I. Ibid. h “d ra wówo; 8 ray 'Iovězíay in Tárol; #9ápero, 2 22@'søy TeXEvraºs. Joſeph, ibid. cap. 24. ' Deuteron. xii. 1 1, 12, 13, 14. 2 Kings viii. 29. 2 Chron. vii. 2. * See Amosix. 9. “I will fift the houſe of Iſrael among all na- “tions, like as corn is fifted in a ſieve, yet ſhall not the leaſt grain “fall upon the earth.” penſation. of John the Baptiſt. 353 penſation. This great event was a teſtimony to all men, that the peculiar church of Iſrael was diſſolved, and that the ſpiritual kingdom of Jeſus would comprehend all kindreds, and nations, and tongues. And accordingly, Jeſus prophetically marked this act of his Judicial power, as imme- diately and effectually leading to the univerſal eſtabliſhment of his own kingdom ; “ He ſhall “ ſend his angels, with a great ſound of a trum- “ pet, and they ſhall gather together his elect “ from the four winds I.” The trumpet of the Goſpel would then be ſounded by the meſſen- gers m of Jeſus in all lands, and his elect would hear it, and be gathered unto him from one end of heaven to the other. The Jews endeavoured, under Hadrian, to re- cover the remains of their city, with an intent to rebuild it, and reſtore the laws and worſhip of their fathers. In vain ; they were again given up to ſlaughter, and famine, and peſtilence, and fire n. If any ſurvived this ſecond overthrow, them the edict of Hadrian prohibited” on pain of * See Lightfoot, and Whitby, on this place. m "Ayyºxo; frequently means, ſimply, a meſſenger. Matth. xi. Io. Luke vii. 27. ix. 52. James ii. 25. Rev. ii. I. See Olearii Analyſ. Ep. ad Heb. pag. I I. * See Euſebius, Jerome, Chryſoſtom, and Appian, who lived at that time, Mede's Works, b. iii. pag. 433. all quoted by Newton on Proph. vol. ii. 318, &c. ° Euſeb. H. E. Lightfoot, vol. i. pag. 367. Whitby. See Pref. A d death 354 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony death” from entering, and even from beholding afar off, the miſerable ruins of their city. Another attempt was afterwards made by Ju- iian to defeat the accompliſhment of this pro- phecy of Jeſus, and to reſtore the Law, as a rival to the Goſpel, by rebuilding the temple, and recalling the diſperſed people to Jeruſalem. But, without minutely 4 diſcuſſing the plain evidence of divine interpoſition to prevent the execution of this deſign, it may perhaps be ſuffi- cient here to obſerve, that the prophecy and the promiſe of Jeſus are not defeated of their accompliſhment. The temple and the city of Jeruſalem continue “trodden down of the Gen- “ tiles,” and the Law is in no condition to con- tend as a competitor with the Goſpel. It appears, then, that as the Peculiar kingdom of the Father over Iſrael, as long as it ſhould ſubſiſt, muſt ſtand in the way of the Univerſal Kingdom of Jeſus, He, by ſubverting the Tem- ple and State of Iſrael, within the time and with the ſignal circumſtances, which his own pro- phecy aſſigned, and by thus continuing that ſub- verſion to this day, has given full evidence that the principles, eſtabliſhment, and growth of his own kingdom, entirely coincided and ſtill coin- cide with the counſel and good pleaſure of the Father in him. • P See Lightfoot, vol. i. pag. 367. * See Whitby, Gen. Pref. pag. 28.-Lightfoot, vol. i. 362. SECTION of John the Baptiſt. 35 5. --" SECTION IX. . The kingdom of Satan, an antagoniſt to the kingdom of Jeſus—his promiſe to ſupport the Apoſtles and his Church againſt that enemy— this promiſe he has fulfilled—the ſubſtance of the whole treatiſe recapitulated—concluding reflections. ANOTHER great obſtacle to the increaſe of Jeſus, and to the ſucceſs of his “ little flock” in eſtabliſhing his kingdom, is deſcribed in the words of the Apoſtle Paul; “We wreſtle not “ againſt fleſh and blood, but againſt princi- “palities, againſt powers, againſt the rulers of “ the darkneſs of this world, againſt ſpiritual “wickedneſs in high places'.” This is a full * "Ey roi; inepoyſots—ſcil. x6%pact, ſays Wolf. ad 1. “in heavenly “things,” i.e. remiſſion of fins, juſtification, adoption, &c. Chryſoſt. Tº 28 tº roſ; itrefavior;, cºwri ts, ūtrip tºv inepoyſoy, is-ºw.—But réiroi; is ge- nerally, and more probably, ſupplied. See Hamm. ad l. Satan is called in Scripture, “the Prince of the power of the air."—He, and his confederacy, rul'd the middle Air, Their higheſt Heaven. Miltos, Par. Loſt, i. 516. The ſeventh phial, Rev. xvi. 17. is poured upon the Air, when ido- latrous Babylon falls, which is ſtiled, (xviii. 2.) puxazº wavrºs avºuz- ro; cºx2%ders, and at whoſe fall “the holy apoſtles and prophets” (20) are called upon to rejoice. * Eph. vi. 12. A a 2 deſcription 356 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony deſcription of what Scripture elſewhere com- pendiouſly calls the “power of darkneſs,” and the kingdom of Satan as an antagoniſt to the kingdom of God's dear Son. That enemy is “the God of this world,” the father of “every “thing that maketh a lie,” and eſpecially of re- ligious abominations; uſing in every age, and with all his power and ſubtlety, the falſe theo- logy, the vain philoſophy, and the corrupt paſ- ſions of men, to ſuſtain his own kingdom, and to bear down that of Jeſus. He had his eſtabliſh- ment among the heathen nations; he had his ſynagogue among the Jews ‘; and he “ now “worketh in the children of diſobedience,” and “blindeth their eyes, left the light of the glori- “ous Goſpel of Chriſt, who is the image of God, “ſhould ſhine unto them.” To the whole power and confederacy of ſuch a formidable enemy, aſſuming all ſhapes, even that of an angel of light, the kingdom of Jeſus is oppoſed; and, having himſelf foreſeen the con- flićt between them, he had prepared his diſciples for it, by promiſing them power and ſupport from himſelf; “Behold,” he ſaid to the ſeventy diſciples, “I give unto you power to tread on ſer- “pents and ſcorpions, and over all the power of “ the enemy";” and to an Apoſtle, “Thou art * See 2 Cor. xi. 14. Rev. ii. 9, 1o. * Luke x. 19. "Ivo, p.3, to provºo, twox2&ng, tržyoyev, “ ſº iwi ºozº “Tºy 3ºwagº º #xSpä” 3pdway % > 3 Aid Coxo;. Ex Photii Amphiloch. apud Wolf. Cur, Phil. vol. v. ad calc. pag. 815. . “ Peter, of John the Baptiſt. 337 “Peter, and upon this rock will I build my “church, and the gates of hell ſhall not prevail “ againſt it;” and, to the diſciples at large, after his reſurrection, “Lo, I am with you alway, even “ unto the end of the world.” Thus would the Apoſtles of Jeſus be prepared to encounter the miniſters of Satan, and to con- dućt the Goſpel of their Maſter to its predićted triumph over Heatheniſm, however recommend- ed by Antiquity or ſuſtained by Civil Power. The uninterrupted completion of theſe promiſes of Jeſus could alone enſure his increaſe, and in the midſt of continual ſtruggles maintain the kingdom to his “little flock;” and the power of his diſciples, through the Spirit with which they were baptized, to diſcern this adverſary, and to diſarm and overcome him, was derived from Jeſus himſelf, who wrought with them, and “went forth conquering and to conquerº,” until the repeated ſhocks, which he is giving to the kingdom of Satan, ſhall gradually have accom- pliſhed its downfall. Upon the whole it appears, that as the power of the evil Spirit was and would be every where, and by every means concealed or open, at all times exerted to leſſen Jeſus and his kingdom, he undertook to be always preſent with believers by his power and his grace', and to ſhew himſelf “greater in them, than * Comp. Gal. iv. 14. y Epheſ. iv. 7. I John ii. 20. A a 3 - ‘‘ he 358 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony p “he that is in the world’.” And from the hiſ. tory of the church and of mankind it is evi- dent that he has ſignally fulfilled and is now fulfilling his promiſe. He has therefore given and ſtill gives ſufficient aſſurance, that he will proceed in maintaining the conflict, till Satan as lightning ſhall fall from heaven. - Having now filled up the deſign at firſt pro- poſed, it remains only for me to ſtate the general concluſions, which ſeem to reſult from the whole that has been offered in theſe pages. The baptiſmal doctrines of John, and the an- cient prophecies reſpecting the Meſſiah and his kingdom, agreed in their true principles and im- port, and therefore might both proceed from the ſame divine Spirit. But, as the Baptiſt, in aſſign- ing the attributes of the Meſſiah, and in charac- terizing his kingdom, proceeded upon that ſpiri- tual ſenſe of Scripture, which entirely contra- dićted the notions and traditions of the Jews; and, above all, added to the prophecies many new and original circumſtances which were af- terwards fulfilled, it appears, that a divine re- velation had been actually vouchſafed to him- ſelf. - Several attributes of the Meſfiah's perſon and office John, as his Forerunner, predićted, before he knew him ; and after the Meſſiah was per- ſonally notified to him by divine revelation, he . . John iv. 4. - aſcribed of John the Baptiſt. 359 aſcribed to him many new characters of official and perſonal glory, which ſeemed not to have been revealed to the Baptiſt at his original miſ- fion. Theſe and other evidences were pointed out in proof that he acted under continual inſpi- ration from God. All theſe characters John, as a Witneſs, applied to Jeſus whom he had baptized to the office of Meſſiah. In order to ſhew that his application of theſe characters was juſt, he inſtanced the ſign of the deſcent and abode of the Spirit upon Jeſus, which he ſaw, and the voice of the Father proclaiming his beloved Son, which he heard. When Jeſus entered upon his miniſtry, he aſſumed, and by diſplaying the mighty works of the Father, and of the Spirit that dwelt in him, juſtified himſelf in aſſuming, the ſeveral charac- ters, which had been previouſly aſcribed to him by the Baptiſt. At the ſame time he gave pro- phetical views of the various circumſtances and ſituations through which he ſhould paſs, and of ſeveral ſucceſſive acts of power which he would diſplay, in accompliſhing thoſe ſeveral charac- ters, which the Baptiſt had aſcribed to him, and which he had thus aſſumed to himſelf. He alſo delivered prophecies, parallel indeed to thoſe of John, but far exceeding the meaſure of the prophetical ſpirit in the Baptiſt. In his minute particularity as to circumſtances; in his exact limitations as to time; and in his original A a 4 diſpoſition 360 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony diſpoſition and arrangement of things in the work of redemption, all implying the ſame per- feót knowledge of the human and divine mind, the glory of the Spirit of God in him appeared through the veil of his fleſh. And moreover, by promiſing to fulfill his own prophecies, and ac- tually fulfilling them after his death and reſur- rećtion, and after his aſcending up where he was before, to the glory which he had with the Fa- ther before the world was ; in a word, by deli- vering prophecies and promiſes in his ſtate of hu- miliation, which he has to this time ſignally ac- compliſhed in his ſtate of glory, he has given evidence which ſtrengthens daily, that he was the Son of God, and came down from heaven, and, being made perfect in all his offices, is be- come “ the author of eternal ſalvation to them “ that obey him.” * The general ſubſtance of the foregoing pages will, it is preſumed, yield a ſufficient foundation for theſe concluſions, if the authenticity of the Goſpel-hiſtory, to which the appeal has all along been unreſervedly made, cannot reaſonably be diſputed. With reſpect to this point it may be urged, that many prophecies of Jeſus which have been here conſidered, namely, that his Goſpel ſhould be preached throughout the Ro- man empire, and that moſt of his Apoſtles ſhould be put to death, and Peter particularly by cruci- fixion, before the end of Iſrael ſhould come ; and of John the Baptiſt. 361 and that the city and temple of Jeruſalem ſhould be overthrown, and trodden down of the Gen- tiles, till the end of a period not yet fulfilled ; and that the Jews ſhould be “carried captive “into all lands,” before that very generation of men ſhould paſs away; were all extant in written Goſpels, long before any one of theſe predićtions was accompliſheda. Hiſtory, ſacred, eccleſiaſtical, and profane, and even the preſent condition of Jeruſalem and of the Jewiſh people, concur in yielding teſtimony, that all theſe prophecies ei- ther have been exactly fulfilled already, or are now in a courſe of accompliſhment. Since then the divine Spirit only, which fore- feeth all things, could have dićtated theſe pro- phecies, and the divine power only, which or- dereth all things, could have exactly adjuſted the ſeveral events to the predićtions, as they ſtood in the New Teſtament writings; it ſeems evident that both at the firſt preaching of the Goſpel by Jeſus, and at the written publication of it by the Evangeliſts, God ſet his ſeal upon it, and marked it for his own, by applying his tranſcendent at- tributes of Preſcience and Power to witneſs and ſupport it; and, conſequently, that the baptiſmal * The Goſpel of St. Matthew is generally ſaid to have been writ- ten in the eighth year after the aſcenſion of Jeſus; thoſe of Mark and Luke, before the fall of Jeruſalem. See this point purſued, and proved, at large, in Jortin's Rem. on Eccleſ. Hiſt, vol. i. pag, 41, &c. predićtions 362 On the Prophecies and Teſtimony, &c, predićtions and teſtimony of John, and the pro- phecies of Jeſus, as both are repreſented in the Goſpels, were truly “the witneſs of God, which “he hath teſtified of his Son,” O N T H E PRINCIPLE OF REDEMPTION, WHETHER PREMIAL, O R PENAL. O N THE PREMIAL PRINCIPLE OF REDEMPTION. S E CT I O N I. Qf divine Rečtitude, as it appears from the Word of God. SINCE the condemnation of ſin in the fleſh a ſeems to be aſſigned by St. Paul as one of the divine purpoſes in the miſſion of Chriſt as a ſin- offering, many will think that God did not act in * See Rom. viii. 3. There ſeems to be an obſcurity in the verſion, from which the original text is free. The words of St. Paul are, vºy wipºla.; iv Špoiáuzt, go.gzès 2,2priz., * wift Guzgría. As in the Old Teſtament zig; &paeria, is commonly connected with the name of the ſacrifice, p.6×ov, cºwry, &c. (ſee Whitby on this place,) to de- note them reſpectively to be fin-offerings, ſo alſo the expreſſion is to be completed here, viº, aspi &p.opria;. The verſion would then run thus ; “God ſending his own Son, in the likeneſs of ſinful fleſh, and “ as a ſin-offering,” &c. his 206 On the Premial Principle his work of Redemption without a penal or ju- dicial principle. - But upon a ſuppoſition that a judicial motive to the miſſion of Chriſt may not be determinately attributed to God in Scripture, the Redemption of man has been conſidered as an included part of that reward, which the virtue and ſufferings of the Redeemer merited and received. And this principle, which may be termed Premial, has been preferred to the Judicial one, upon the idea that the former is conſiſtent, but the latter irreconcileable, with rectitude, or the rule of righteouſneſs and truth, on which all agree that God invariably proceeds. How either the one or the other of theſe prin- ciples may be affected by Scriptural language reſpecting Redemption, is a queſtion upon which nothing will be here obſerved ; the preſent in- tention is to enquire ſeparately, whether we may certainly judge that the premial principle is agreeable, and the judicial one contrary, to di- vine rectitude, when applied as a teſt of both. It will depend on the reſult, whether we can venture upon that preſumption, which the pre- mial ſcheme implies; and whether the judicial purpoſe is, or not, aſcribed to God upon ſufficient evidence. - From the Word and the Works of God, where they are clear and determinate, the true idea of divine rectitude muſt be drawn, whenever we venture to judge of the agreement or diſagree- Inent of Redemption. 367 ment of any proceeding with it. For ſince it is certain that reótitude will be preſerved inviolate in both, no philoſophical poſition of our own, if inconſiſtent with the known declaration and pro- ceeding of God, can be applied juſtly to deter- mine what, in a controverted caſe, he may have ſpoken or done. - I. In his Word, then, the denunciation oc- curs; “ In the day that thou eateſt thereof, thou “ſhalt ſurely die.” Accordingly as God is con- ſidered as moral, or ſimply as ſupreme, Governor, we muſt attribute this denunciation to moral rečtitude, or to mere will. The act of ſupreme will, independent of a moral character, cannot determine any thing in a queſtion of rectitude, and therefore is out of the caſe. But conſidering God as regulating will by eſſential rectitude, we ſeem obliged to admit that the injunction of obe- dience, and the denunciation of death as the pe- nalty of diſobedience, were both conſonant to moral right, and, if otherwiſe, that he would not have delivered the one, nor have denounced the other. - Between the penal denunciation, then, and the principle of rectitude, it appears that no con- tradićtion ſubſiſted. And upon delivery of that denunciation, the ground of divine reëtitude is ſomewhat enlarged. A new queſtion will thence ariſe as to the degree and extent in which it may be right in God to fulfill that denunciation. He is “faithful and true, and cannot deny himſelf;” and, 368 On the Premial Principle and, if ſo, another reaſon in reótitude may inter- vene, againſt the impunity of diſobedience. Upon the actual entry of fin into the world, what was, then, the operation of the Mercy and the Judgment of God The ſcheme of Redemp- tion then began to take effect; and it ſeems that the influence of rectitude upon both thoſe divine attributes, in that ſcheme, may in ſome degree be calculated from the proceeding of God upon human tranſgreſſion. In his treatment of the fallen offenders, the judicial and the merciful principle were both diſcernible, each in their ap- propriate point of view. And why, if it was conſiſtent with divine reëtitude, that, when mo- ral diſobedience enſued, the puniſhment de- nounced ſhould not follow The ſcheme of Re- demption became neceſſary, becauſe God had threatened and would puniſh, and yet would ſave. From hence it can ſcarcely be preſumed con- ſiſtent with divine reëtitude, to annul the puniſh- ment of diſobedience. But it may be obſerved further, that the pro- miſe of redemption was followed by the infliction of puniſhment. And this particular circumſtance ſeems rather to imply that divine mercy might not, in rectitude, over-rule a real operation of divine judgment. At leaſt, the promiſe of re- demption gives no authority to preſume, that God had no judicial purpoſe in it, or that divine rečtitude left the divine mercy at uncontrouled liberty of Redemption. 369 liberty to ſave ſinners without penal conſidera- tions. To prevent the fall, or to exclude the penal conſequences of it, might not have been irreconcileable with ſupreme will, ačting on the ſingle motive of benevolence; but, apparently, the moral perfections of God, operating alſo on their own principle of rectitude, ſo adjuſted the ſcheme of redemption in all its parts, that it ac- compliſhed the purpoſes of divine benevolence to man, without infringing the rule of righteouſ- neſs by treating ſinners as if they were finleſs, that is, without leaving them wholly unpuniſhed. Accommodated to the caſe is the language of God by his prophet; “Zion ſhall be redeemed “with judgment, and her converts with righte- “ouſneſs.” Thus far appearances ſeem not to warrant a preſumption, that the abſolute impu- nity of the guilty is conſiſtent with divine recti- tude, and that God, in the miſſion of his Son as Redeemer, had no judicial view to the con- demnation of ſin in the fleſh. Thus again, when God brought a flood of wa- ters upon the earth, and thereby inflicted the heavieſt vengeance that ever yet has fallen upon a ſinful world, the new bleſſing on the ground, and on the poſterity of Noah, was in the divine intention. Purpoſes of the utmoſt benignity to the race of man were in reſerve, yet they were not accompliſhed in ſuch a way as to ſet aſide a proper puniſhment of ſin. There ſeems to be a B b principle, 37O On the Premial Principle principle, that regulates and meaſures divine be- nevolence to mankind ; if it be reëtitude, there is no appearance here, that the total impunity of finners is not contradictory to it. Upon the interceffion of Moſes, the Lord re- pented of the evil he thought to do unto his people, for the worſhip of the golden calf. Yet the ſword of the children of Levi was drawn, by the judicial command of God, againſt bre- thren, companions, and friends. And although the Lord went ſo far in the exerciſe of mercy, as to ſend his angel before the people, ſtill ſome penal viſitation was kept in reſerve; “Never- “theleſs, in the day when I viſit, I will viſit “ their fin upon them.” There are many in- ſtances ſimilar to theſe in the hiſtory of Iſrael. God ſpared them frequently, but left not their provocations wholly unpuniſhed. d Even in the caſe of Moſes himſelf, neither his high ſtand in the divine favour, nor his faithful- neſs, nor his earneſt prayer, prevented his penal excluſion from the promiſed land. And even fins of ignorance had their appointed fin-offering for atonement. - In every divine government, whether of Iſrael in particular, or of the world at large, rectitude will indiſputably rule; and that can ſcarcely be preſumed, in different adminiſtrations of the ſame divine governor, to preſcribe oppoſite principles. There ſeems to be no ſufficient authority for ſup- poſing of Redemption. 371 poſing it would exclude the abſolute impunity of the guilty in one divine ſcheme, and yet admit it in another. SECTION II. This conſtruction ſupported by the tenor of divine declaration—by appearances in the Works of God—reflection on the caſe of the objects of Redemption. TO ſupport this conſtruction of the few caſes referred to, every ſtrong declaration of God, in his Word, that ſinners ſhall not be “wholly un- “ puniſhed,” would naturally tend. One among them, the only one that will be mentioned, is that proclamation made to the Mediator of the law, wherein the Lord expreſsly ſtiles himſelf “abundant in goodneſs and truth, keeping mer- “cy for thouſands, forgiving iniquity, tranſgreſ- “ſion, and fin ;” but adds, nevertheleſs, “ and “ that will by no means clear the guilty.” Diſ- penſations of mercy and forgiveneſs are the re- ſult of goodneſs; but are adjuſted to truth, by not confounding the caſes of guilt and innocence, and treating either of them in contradićtion to the nature of the thing. From this ſhort appeal to the Word of God we may obſerve, that, inſtead of favouring the preſumption, that divine rectitude admits of the B b 2 abſo- 37.2 On the Premial Principle abſolute impunity of finners, it has rather tended to ſhew, that whenever we venture to ſpeak of the merciful and the judicial attributes of God, as they may affect finners, we are not juſtified in ſuppoſing the exerciſe of the one without the other. We may next enquire, whether the conſtruc- tion here put upon the Word of God is ſup- ported by actual and preſent appearances in his Works. The courſe of nature is a divine ad- miniſtration conducted upon principles of moral rectitude. By the law eſtabliſhed therein, the conſequences of ſin, as ſuch, are penal; and in its very nature fin has a tendency to the pro- dućtion even of greater puniſhment than it re- ceives at preſent. Thus, throughout the natural government of God, his judicial authority is ſeen in actual force, whether operating by a neceſſary relation of cauſe and effect, originally ſettled by himſelf, or by the inſtrumentality of civil ſanc- tions. We may alſo take into our view the conſtitu- tion of human nature, which is conſtructed upon ſimilar principles; ſo that the divine government of the world at large, and of individuals in par- ticular, is condućted by the ſame rule of moral rečtitude. The penal effects of ſin are, accordingly, in ſome degree or other of them at leaſt, though not perhaps in full proportion to the offence, conſtant and inevitable; and no apparent provi- ſion of Redemption. 373 fion is made by the author of nature to prevent them. If he had ſo conſtructed the courſe of things, that repentance, that reformation, could in all caſes, or even in any, actually ſet aſide all the penal conſequences of ſin, there might ap- pear ſome authority for ſuppoſing, that the entire impunity of ſin was not irreconcileable with his moral rectitude; and we might, perhaps, be in- duced to argue, by analogy, from the conſtitu- tion of nature to the ſcheme of redemption, as both are the plan of the ſame author, “ with “whom,” morally as well as eſſentially, “is no “variableneſs, nor ſhadow of turning.” But, on the contrary, if the relation eſtabliſhed between fin and puniſhment holds invariably, in ſome de- gree or other, throughout nature, there are no appearances to juſtify a preſumption, that in any divine ſcheme a treatment of ſinners, in no re- ſpects penal, is reconcileable with divine reëti- tude. It might rather be preſumed from thoſe appearances, that the ends, which the reëtitude of God had preſcribed to his natural and moral government of mankind, made it neceſſary, that finners ſhould not be “wholly unpuniſhed.” It ſeems, then, that neither the Word nor the Works of God imply that the abſolute impunity of ſin infers no violation of divine rectitudº. Neither a purpoſe of mercy, nor even the promiſe of redemption, has been found to exclude a proper puniſhment, where the nature and truth of the caſe of ſinners required it. B b 3 It 374 On the Premial Principle It appears, then, to remain entirely dependent upon the real ſtate of thoſe who were the in- tended objects of redemption, whether the judi- cial attribute of God ſhould, conformably to what we know of divine reëtitude, have any or no Operation. - We are, then, in the next place, to obſerve the nature of that caſe, which the divine ſcheme of redemption affected. It is plainly that of pe- nitence; yet not ſo much in reſpect of that part in the character, which, after reformation, be- came virtuous, as of that, which, before conver- ſion, was vicious. For if in the accompliſhment of redemption mercy be ſaid to rejoice againſt judgment, we may expect to find in the redeemed proper objects of both. The matter, then, may be reſted upon the light in which the conſciences of penitents repreſent their charaćters to them- ſelves. On the paſt they look now with ſorrow and with ſhame; for guilt alone preſents itſelf there: and as the eye of God attends them in the retroſpect, his view diſcerns even more of their guilt than meets their own. With relation to this part of their character, they were, in the language of Scripture, as well as in their own conſcious eſtimation, “ the children of wrath, ‘seven as others.” And every real penitent knows and feels the caſe to be capable of greater ſtrength. Even in his regenerate ſtate, how greatly does moral demerit overbalance his mo- ral worth In fact, then, penitence is not the ſame, of Redemption. 375 ſame, nor equivalent, with innocence"; it im- plies a mixture of guilt precontracted, and pu- niſhment proportionably deſerved. A divine diſpenſation, ſtrictly moral and right- eous, will be adjuſted, in all its parts, to the whole truth of the fact, and not incur an in- fringement of reëtitude, by treating oppoſite caſes in a way contrary to their real deſert. How far the worthy part in the character of penitence may go, in mitigation of thoſe penal conſe- quences which the unworthy part of it merits, is not the enquiry: the queſtion depends upon the abſolute impunity of ſo much real guilt, as conſtituted the very caſe that redemption was intended to reach. If it be agreeable to divine rečtitude, that the penitent ſhould be treated ac- cording to what he is, in whatever degree he is actually a ſinner, in that very degree he is ex- cluded from the preſumption of impunity. If, in fact, the impunity of ſinners had been con- ſiſtent with rectitude, much of the need of re- demption diſappears. For it could not be ne- ceſſary to the removal of puniſhment, if it had been right that none ſhould be inflicted. * This has been frequently ſhewn; but no where, that I know of, with more ſtrength and clearneſs, than in the very Eſſay which gave occaſion to this Tračt. (Mr. Balguy's Eſſay on Redemption.) Cigero, as Dr. Shuckford remarks, goes no farther than this; “Quem poe- “nitet peccaſſe, pene eſt innocens.” B b 4 SECTION 376 On the Premial Principle SECTION III. Concluſion from foregoing appearances—objec- tion thence ariſing to the premial ſcheme— view of conſiderations prepared to obviate this objećtion. TO place the point under conſideration diſ- tinétly in view, it may, then, be expedient to aſſign the preciſe ground, upon which it ſtands. It appears not, from the Word of God, that either the promiſe of redemption, or any aſſignable pur- poſe or declaration of mercy, over-rules the pro- per operation of a judicial principle in the divine condućt towards ſinners : and, in the conſtitu- tion of nature, which is the Work of God, the effect of that principle *, upon every caſe of ſin, is obſerved to be, not occaſional and precarious, but conſtant and neceſſary. Judging, then, ac- cording to appearances, we can hardly venture to preſume, that the abſolute impunity of finners is not repugnant to that rectitude, upon which the Word and the Works of the divine moral Governor proceed. & * To prevent any miſconception, it would perhaps have been a more proper expreſſion, if I had ſaid, “ ſome effect of that principle.” My meaning is, that there is no caſe of fin, with no effect of the ju- dicial principle enſuing. - On of Redemption. 377 On examination we find alſo, that the very caſe, upon which the neceſſity of redemption depends, was, in fact, a caſe of ſin ; which, if it was attended with impunity, received a treat- ment, the conſiſtency of which with the na- ture of the thing, and the apparent righteouſ- neſs of the divine government, is not aſcer- tained. The objećtion, then, hence ariſing to the pre- mial ſcheme of redemption, may be thus repre- ſented. Aćtual guilt, there admitted in the ob- jects of redemption, reduces them to that very caſe, which rectitude, as it ſeems exemplified in the Word and Works of God, excludes from the impunity preſumed : and it implies in them ſuch real circumſtances, that, if the divine proceeding was not contradićtory to them, would infer a judicial treatment. The premial ſcheme might ſtand upon a footing of agreement with recti- tude, if the puniſhment of ſin had therein an aſſignable place, or objećt: but as it repreſents it to fall no where, and founds atonement on the moral worth only of Chriſt, the impunity of guilt ſeems to follow from the premiſes therein laid down, in apparent contradićtion to that principle of reëtitude, on which the ſcheme is maintained. This objection was foreſeen at the time of propoſing the premial ſcheme; and, by way of obviating it, one conſideration urged is, that “whatever puniſhment the caſe of the ſinner “ might 378 On the Premial Principle “might require, the merits of the Redeemer muſt “require an immenſe reward.” Here the puniſh- ment required by the caſe of the finner (that is, by rectitude, which is ſaid to imply ſuch a treat- ment, as is ſuited to the nature of the thing) is ſuppoſed to be outweighed by the reëtitude of aſſigning the Redeemer a reward, as great, as his merits required. But this ſeems to fall ſhort of the point: the proper queſtion would be, whe- ther, if rectitude diſallowed the impunity of finners, the two divine parties, ačting on the ſame will and the ſame principle of reëtitude in the ſcheme of redemption, may be juſtly pre- ſumed, the one of them to have aſſigned, the other to have choſen, a reward, which involved in it that impunity of guilt If this may not be preſumed, the greatneſs of the reward merited by the Redeemer will not outweigh the reëtitude of treating the guilty penally. Another conſideration alſo, that the bleſfings of redemption are not granted directly to finners on their own account, but accrue to them indi- rectly, as firſt conferred on Chriſt, ſeems inſuf- ficient to remove the difficulty. For the true enquiry here would be, whether the bleſfings of redemption would be extended to ſinners by any way of intervention whatſoever, that inferred their impunity, if rectitude required their penal treatment If not, the objection continues as valid againſt the indirect method of conveyance, as againſt the other. Nor of Redemption. 379 Nor ſeems the objection ſufficiently obviated by a diſtinétion made between the truth and the whole truth of the complicated caſe of penitents, or by imputing that condućt to God, which, upon compariſon of all circumſtances, in ſome reſpects is fit, in others unfit. For the queſtion relates only to that particular kind of fitneſs or unfitneſs, which is implied in the notion of agreement or diſagreement with divine reëti- tude; and when the proceeding, attributed to God in any caſe, ſeems to violate all or any of the known principles of truth and righteouſneſs, alS they are exemplified in his Word and Works, the reaſon is plain for not acceding to the appli- cation. From the turn and reach of the conſiderations, prepared to meet this objection, it appears ſtill, that the principle of divine reëtitude, when ap- plied to the doctrine of redemption, does not conclude in favour of the premial ſcheme, but rather of the opinion, that God acted in the miſ- fion of his Son upon a judicial purpoſe of con- demning ſin in the fleſh. Upon the whole; a Providence without Juſ. tice ſeems to be no article in the belief of nature; and from that Juſtice it appears difficult to de- tach that particular branch of it, which directly relates to ſinners, as objects of puniſhment; and even more difficult, to conceive that very part of it to be occaſional only, and exemplified in the introdućtory diſpenſations of God, but dor- Inant 38O On the Premial Principle, &c. mant and indifferent in the laſt and the greateſt. And if, agreeably to divine reëtitude, judgment had “paſſed upon all men to condemnation,” and yet Redemption, even although it “ con- “cluded all under ſin,” proceeded, excluſively of a judicial purpoſe, on premial views to the Re- deemer; then, apparently, ſupreme will con- ferred impunity upon objects ſtill in that very ſtate and condition, wherein divine reëtitude had previouſly decreed their puniſhment. If the whole character of God could be reſolved into ſim- ple abſolute benevolence, ſo much might perhaps be expected to flow from it; but if rectitude be the meaſure and rule of it, the free-gift of the former can hardly be preſumed to annul the ef- feót of the latter—it might rather be preſumed, that the ſcheme of Redemption would carry a relation to ſinners, in one way as objects of mercy, in another as objects of puniſhment, that God “might be juſt, and yet the juſtifier 4 of “ him that believeth” in the Redeemer. * So Whitby in his Paraphr. In the original 22, &c. So perhaps in the Greek Epigram, AoûAo; Erſkºrnro; yewipºv, 22; cºp,' 2wºrngos, Kai werío, Igos, zoºl pāo; 292,cºrok, “And yet beloved of the Gods.” Compare Heb. iii. 9. §oxºacá, p.e., zai ſãow, &c. “proved me, and yet they ſaw.” But Glaſſ. Phil. Sac. de Conjunétione, p. 805, renders it, “although,” which might be done in the paſſage to the Romans. II. O N T H E JUD ICIAL PRINCIPLE O F REDEMPTION. S E C T I O N I. The Judicial purpoſe—view of objections to it —innocence and puniſhment in what ſenſe not Änconſiſtent—Scriptural inſtances—general in- ferences. As appearances in the Word and Works of God ſeem to give no encouragement to preſume that the premial principle is conſiſtent with divine rečtitude, it is poſſible alſo that they may not authorize a preſumption that the judicial princi- ple has any contradićtion to it. To proceed then with the counterpart of the preceding reflections— A ſcheme 38.2 On the Judicial Principle A ſcheme of redemption, if, agreeably to di- vine reëtitude, it will moſt probably reſpect ſin- ners judicially, muſt yet, under the form of an aćt of grace, imply ſome proviſion made for their deliverance from puniſhment. Suppoſing then that the Scriptures declare, what many underſtand from them, that God ad- juſted redemption to the ends of benevolence to mankind by ſending his Son to redeem ſinners from the curſe of the law, and to the rule of rec- titude by appointing him to bear “ their fins in “ his own body on the tree,” the preſent en- quiry will be, whether the death of the Son of God, or the ſacrifice of his human nature, was irreconcileable with divine rectitude, if a ju- dicial purpoſe weighed with God in the ap- pointment of it, and gave it any penal relation to ſin. And to this end we may take a view of objec- tions that are made to the judicial principle, under the idea of ſubſtituting the premial one in its place. One objećtion is, that “innocence and puniſh- “ment are inconſiſtent and incompatible ideas.” This is adopted language, and ſeems to confound ideas that are diſtinct. The innocence of Chriſt was his own ; the puniſhment was not his own. But the objection ſuppoſes the innocence and the puniſhment to have the ſame perſonal rela- tion to Chriſt; if they had, there muſt be an in- conſiſtence; if they had not, there may be none. It of Redemption. 383 It may then be doubted whether the objection, as it ſtands, really reaches the caſe of Chriſt. The puniſhment of innocence, as ſuch, would in- deed involve a moral contradiction; but it is not ſaid that God condemned innocence in the fleſh. The only ſenſe, then, in which the objection is applicable to the judicial principle, ſeems to be this ; that the innocence of Chriſt, and his ſub- jection to that puniſhment which ſinners, and not he, had deſerved, are inconſiſtent and incom- patible ideas. To judge of this objećtion, it will be requiſite for us to obſerve in what light the denunciations and proceedings of God, in his Word, place it. The caſes produced ſhall be few— For the wickedneſs of Sodom and its depend- ent cities, God reſolved to deſtroy the inhabi- tants. Of children, then, that is of real inno- cents, how great a portion periſhed in the com- mon puniſhment of the public profligacy Pharaoh and his people had deſtroyed the Iſraelitiſh children ; God, by a penal retaliation, deſtroyed the firſt-born of the Egyptians. The puniſhment of thoſe, who had committed the offence, fell upon parties that had committed none *. dº * For ſome of theſe, and for other fimilar inſtances, ſee Jortin's Serm. vol. vii. p. 192. For the fin of Ham, Canaan was ſubjećted to a curſe, Gen. ix. 25. The ſons of Achan were puniſhed together with their father for his, and not their, wickedneſs, Joſh. vii. 24. The puniſhment of Ahab's fin was not inflićted upon him, but upon his ſon, 1 Kings Xxi. 29. So alſo to David, upon his repentance, the prophet 384 On the Judicial Principle The children of murmuring Iſrael were doom- ed to wander in the wilderneſs forty years, and to bear the whoredoms of their fathers. The parties here ſubjećted to real puniſhment were innocent of the fin which they were to bear. And in whatever degree the children would ac- tually bear the ſin of their progenitors, in that degree they would ſuffer penally for ill-deſert which was not their own. In the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abi- ram, wives, ſons, daughters, and all that apper- tained to them, went down alive into the pit with them. If any Iſraelitiſh city committed idolatry, the nation was ordered to deſtroy the place, and every creature in it. - It was the command of God, “Go and ſmite “Amalek, and ſpare them not, but ſlay in- “fant and ſuckling.” The caſe was nearly the ſame with reſpect to all the nations of Ca- naan. The ill-deſert, in the three preceding in- ſtances, had not been ſo univerſal as the puniſh- Inent. - Again —Famine raged in Iſrael in the days of David three years, year after year—for Saul and his blobdy houſe, becauſe he ſlew the Gibeonites. Thirty years and upwards after the prophet ſaid, “Thou ſhalt not die, howbeit the child that is born of ‘‘thee ſhall ſurely die.” Latin. Verſ. “Dominus tranſtulit peccatum “tuum," i.e. its puniſhment. See Grot. de Satisf. cap. 4. Stebbing, Chriſt. Juſtified, Io9, &c. - - crime, of Redemption. 385 crime the judicial inflićtion came ; of courſe, many were likely to ſuffer grievouſly in the ca- lamity, who had been far from a condition to take a ſhare in contracting the guilt. The pu- niſhment, to which they were ſubjected, had no aſſignable foundation in miſconduct of their own. From the context it appears alſo, that an atone- ment, made by the death of ſeven of the houſe of Saul, prevailed with God to remove the national calamity f. The change of the perſons as to the puniſhment was not grounded upon any communication of the guilt. When the Angel ſmote the people with peſ- tilence, David ſaw him, and ſaid, “Lo I have “finned; but theſe ſheep, what have they done? “Let thy hand, I pray thee, be againſt me.”— Iſrael and Judah were innocent of that crime, which the miniſter of the divine infliction pu- niſhed; and the king felt and owned that the vengeance was only deſerved by himſelf. The provocations of Manafieh were alſo pu- niſhed in Judah, at a time when the true re- ligion was publicly reſtored by a righteous king. The guilt of blood ſhed in all the land, and of idolatrous corruptions introduced therein, was perſonal in Manaſſeh ; yet, “for that which he “ did in Jeruſalem,” the Lord removed Judah out of his ſight, and the divine vengeance began to operate in the reign of Joſiah. The conſtruc- * 2 Sam. xxi. 13, 14. C C - tion 386 On the Judicial Principle tion of Eſdras on the caſe is this ;-‘‘ As for the “things that came to paſs in his time, they were “ written in former times, concerning thoſe that “finned ; ſo that the words of the Lord roſe up “ againſt Iſrael.” In moſt of theſe caſes, the very expreſſions, in which they are delivered, ſeem neceſſarily to imply, that the cauſe of the judicial inflićtions upon the ſeveral ſufferers lay not in their own demerit. An imitation of the ill condućt of others cannot be aſſigned as the cauſe of it, ſince that would contradićt the terms; for that imi- tation would be a fin of their own, and would make the puniſhment their own alſo ; but they are repreſented expreſsly as bearing the iniquities of others. - - Theſe and other ſimilar inſtances exemplify the declarations of God, that he would viſit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation ; and the pre- ſent ſtate of Iſrael, conſidered in all circum- ſtances, is alſo a ſtanding example of judicial in- flićtion upon the children for the iniquity of their fathers. Every man, even in prudence, but much more in duty, will be extremely cautious, both of the manner in which he makes up his mind, and of the language in which he hazards an opinion, upon Scriptural caſes. After viewing theſe in- ſtances in every light, in which it was in my power to place them, they appear directly applica- ble of Redemption. 387 ble to the obječtion. They ſeem to exemplify real puniſhment laid upon perſons free from that ill- deſert, which in moſt of the caſes was expreſsly aſſigned as the ground of the penal inflićtion. From them, then, the objection apparently re- ceives no confirmation ; and adjuſting our ideas to the beſt authority poſſible, we ſeem obliged to confider it as notified by ačtual fact in the go- vernment of God, that in certain caſes, and for certain reaſons, it may be conſiſtent with divine rečtitude, that the puniſhment of ill-deſert in ſome ſhould be laid upon others, without any relation therein had to condućt of their own. It ſeems not impoſſible to throw a ſufficient light upon the queſtion of divine rectitude in ſuch proceedings. It may be ſaid, that the reëtitude of the divine conduct on every occaſion, and to every man, depends partly on the exceptions, unknown to us, which God may make, in favour of perſonal worth in him, who bears the puniſhment of others. Whoever, lying under a judicial cala- mity for ill-deſert not his own, is yet perſonally dutiful and obedient to God, in his power it is to reward him perſonally, in the midſt of ven- geance. Thus Joſiah, by an eſpecial favour g, was gathered unto his fathers in peace, and by a timely departure delivered from the evil to come. The phraſe, “gathered to his fathers in peace,” # 2 Chron. xxxiv. 27, 28. and xxxv. 24. C C 2 directly 388 On the Judicial Principle directly conducts our thoughts to a future life of peaceful retribution ; and of every one in ſimilar circumſtances Iſaiah propheſies; “ He ſhall enter “ into peace; they ſhall reſt in their beds, each “one walking in his uprightneſs.” Upon this, then, the great and moſt material conſideration is founded. A knowledge of the whole, and not of a part only, of the government of God is requiſite to complete the ground upon which the rectitude of his meaſures may be cer- tainly determined. If ſufferings may work, in another life, “a far more exceeding and eternal “weight of glory” for thoſe on whom they are laid in this, there ſeems a juſt preſumption againſt repreſenting them as wrongly or injuriouſly in- flićted, even though they are laid upon inno- cence, even though they are in a penal conſi- deration for the fin of others, even though they are inflićted by the act of divine will and power, independently of conſent in the ſufferer. For, upon this idea, they may eaſily ſeem, under any circumſtances, the means of kindneſs, adjuſted to an end of greater kindneſs. The particular interdiction of the law (that the fathers ſhould not be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers) will not authorize any exception here. The reaſon is obvious; after men have killed, there is no more that they can do; they would certainly injure, becauſe of the impoſſibility that they ſhould recompenſe hereafter. God may juſtify him- ſelf; of Redemption. 380 ſelf; “I kill and I make alive, I wound and I “ heal.” It appears, then, that innocence and puniſh- ment may be ſaid conſiſtently to coincide in all caſes, wherein God ſubjects ſome to judicial ſuf- ferings, merited by the fins of others, but not incurred by ill-deſert of their own ; and as this is not without example in the divine conduct, there ſeems no ground to repreſent the proceed- ing as impoſſible or wrong; or to preſume it un- juſt, ſince that very ſuffering, inflicted penally on account of others, may be working, in the pro- greſs and reſult of the divine government, ſuch an overbalance of good to the ſufferer himſelf, that if his view, like that of God, could but con- nect the means and the end, he would not un- thankfully accuſe the hand that laid thoſe ſuffer- ings upon him, nor weakly decline the bleſſing reſerved for them that endure. Thus, the belief of a better reſurrection is aſſigned by St. Paul, as the reaſon that weighed with many to ſuffer without “accepting deliverance.” Indeed, to give this conſideration the utmoſt poſſible weight, it would be neceſſary, that the recompence, ac- cruing in another life, had been actually ſet be- fore the ſufferers in this. But ſtill, though not in their view, it might be in the mind and eye of God; and if ſo, his condućt toward them would be no injuſtice or wrong. C C 3 SECTION 390 On the judicial Principle S E C T I O N II. Of Chriſt's conſent, as to the ground and extent of it—the objection thereto, drawn from caſes of injurious conſent, conſidered. THE full effect of all that has been hitherto obſerved may be applied to Chriſt with a great addition of ſtrength, under the principle of his conſent. It will be neceſſary, then, to illuſtrate that principle in the extent to which it goes, that we may the better calculate the force of an objection, made indeed on general grounds, but, if capable of any particular application to the conſent of Chriſt, ſufficient to prevent it from carrying any concluſive weight in the matter un- der conſideration. It is aſked—Suppoſing the conſent of the in- nocent to be treated as criminals, how can they be injured This ſeems the ſubſtance of the ob- jection; and with reſpect thereto we may ob- ſerve, that, if the innocent are treated as crimi- nais, that is, if Chriſt “ſuffered as really for our “iniquities as if they had been his own,” (which if it be allowed he did, then he ſuffered penally,) ſtill, from what has been ſaid already, and what will immediately follow, there appears no author- ity for preſuming an injury done. Whether the principle of conſent in Chriſt may not involve CIICU. Ill- of Redemption. 391 circumſtances in itſelf ſufficient to remove all ex- ceptions, will be here the proper enquiry. The ground on which it ſtands is not only ex- tremely wide, but alſo excluſively appropriated. He concerted in heaven that plan of redemption, which he afterwards condućted on earth. The method and order to be purſued in the accom- pliſhment of it, all the introductory means, all the intermediate and final parts of the ſcheme, were adjuſted by his own counſel concurring with that of the Father, with whom, by unity of will and of love to mankind, he was a princi- pal to his own appointment as Redeemer. When he had taken upon himſelf the “likeneſs of fin- “ful fleſh,” it was God that was in Chriſt. All the glories of the divine Spirit were ſignally diſ- played in him, both in what he promiſed as Son of God, and what he predićted as a prophet, with the moſt minute particularity as to circumſtances, and the moſt exact limitation as to time, and in his original diſpoſition and arrangement of things in his work of redemption, all implying a perfect inſight into the divine mind; in one word, in him “ were hid all the treaſures of wiſdom and “knowledge.” If theſe circumſtances are car- ried through every relation and reach to which they will go, we may perhaps think it unſafe to ſay, that any poſſibilities that conſent may be founded in weakneſs, or in exceſs of generoſity, by which any one may fall ſhort of that meaſure of regard due to himſelf, as the brave Decii did, C C 4 C Clil 302 On the Judicial Principle can ſuggeſt any ſuſpicion here, that injurious ad- vantage was given on one ſide, and taken on the other, when conſent was circumſtanced like this. We may rathcr preſume that this is an incom- parable caſe; and that no analogy, no argument will hold from the accidents of ordinary conſent among men, “deceiving and being deceived,” to that, which reſulted from the exerciſe of the di- vine perfection of the Son of God in the boſom of the Father. Whatever he was to do when made fleſh, or to endure, and for what purpoſes, and to what effect, having been arranged and ſanctioned by the Spirit of the Father and his own, it was the ſame wiſdom, it was the ſame will, by which he aëted in the form of God, and conſented in the likeneſs of Man. It appears extremely difficult to conceive upon what ground conſent, ſo qualified, ſhould fall ſhort of evincing, that, whatever the ſufferings and the purpoſes of undergoing them were, no injury was done nor received, nor any principle of reëtitude infringed. It ſeems rather to imply, that the condemnation of “ſin in the fleſh,” that is, a judicial purpoſe of God in the miſſion of his Son, was unexception- ably adjuſted to the intereſt of all parties, and to every rule of right. But to ſhew further that the conſent of Chriſt to undergo a judicial condemnation of ſin in his fleſh might not be contradictory to rectitude, nor injurious to himſelf, there is another light, in which the caſe may be repreſented. The “like- “neſs of Redemption. 303 “neſs of ſinful fleſh” (which the Apoſtles repre- fent as a neceſſary requiſite to the ſin-offering) was raiſed into being by the immediate agency of God himſelf, as the inſtrument of his work, that death might be taſted for every man. Of an inſtrument purpoſely prepared by the divine Author of Redemption the diſpoſal and applica- tion, of right, are his. It appears hardly to be preſumed, that the rectitude of this application depends wholly, or even principally, on the na- ture and quality of the uſes, to which it might be applied. One would rather preſume, that in a ſubſervience to that ſpecial purpoſe, for which it was prepared by an operation extraordinary and miraculous, the duty and obedience of that fleſh lay. “ For this cauſe came I to this hour,” is the language of the Redeemer; and whatever implies duty, implies the reëtitude of preſcribing it, and ſeems, in this particular caſe, to exclude exceptions either to the right of appointing him, or to his own obedience in conſenting, to bear “our fins in his own body on the tree.” Eſpe- cially if it be remembered, that the appointed ſufferings of Chriſt, whether they had or had not any judicial reſpect and relation to human ſins, as the cauſe of them, were, in either caſe, exactly the ſame. For then the matter will appear in this light; God by an extraordinary agency pre- pared for himſelf his own inſtrument of ſinleſs fleſh, that therein “through death he might de- “ ſtroy him that had the power of death.” Ac- cordingly, 394 On the Judicial Principle cordingly, God in Chriſt applied that voluntary inſtrument to the purpoſe appointed, and deli- vered it unto death, thereby “reconciling the “world unto himſelf.” Now, even upon the premial ſcheme of redemption, this whole pro- ceeding would ſtand clear of any infringement of rectitude ; for the innocence of Chriſt ſeems not to cancel a real right in God of diſpoſal, ſo founded and ſo exerciſed. And if Chriſt in his fleſh was, notwithſtanding his innocence, or- dained and given to ſuffer and to die for us without ſuppoſing injurious advantage made of his conſent; there ſeems no occaſion to ſuppoſe it, though the ſame ſufferings were inflicted upon a penal confideration of the ſin of others as the cauſe of them. In the actual ſufferings, if any where, the perſonal injury ſeems rather to lie, than in the reaſon and principle, with which they were decreed and fulfilled. But this repreſentation may be carried farther ſtill, to ſhew that caſes of injurious conſent have no relation nor effect here. The ground of con- ſent, as it is to be attributed to Chriſt, reſults from the principles immediately preceding, as follows; that the ſame divine mind, which had been a principal in the original plan of redemp- tion, afterwards in an inſtrument of fleſh, pre- pared miraculouſly by the “power of the High- “ eſt” for that eſpecial purpoſe, condućted the accompliſhment of the ſcheme. This places the conſent of Chriſt in the light of one operation of r the of Redemption. 395 the ſame divine will continued from firſt to laſt; in apparent proof, that the conſiſtency of the whole proceeding with rectitude may be pre- fumed, but that the poſſibility of injurious ad- vantage made of conſent may not. What may be added here is, that whatever might be the particular purpoſe of God in laying thoſe ſuffer- ings upon the fleſh of Chriſt, his decree had aſ- certained to it an infinite overbalance of reward. In the caſe of other ſufferers, it was before called a juſt preſumption, that their “light afflićtion, “ which was but for a moment,” might work for them a “far more exceeding and eternal “weight of glory.” But what was to be pre- fumed in other caſes, was certain and known in the caſe of Chriſt, laid down and acted upon as a commanding motive. The ſufferings, then, and the glory of Chriſt's fleſh were in one plan; both were parts of one great ſcheme, not opened to him ſingly, but in connection with each other. Through the temporary ſufferings of the intro- dućtory part on earth he ſaw and devotedly and willingly took his certain way to everlaſting glo- ry and honour in heaven. Can any concurrent purpoſe of God, even if judicial, can the inno- cence of Chriſt, can any conſideration imaginable, put this caſe in any other light but that of ſignal kindneſs to his fleſh, in laying upon it theſe ſuf- ferings, with ſuch a recompence of glory in re- ſerve And what other foundation for the con- ſent of Chriſt in the fleſh can we conceive aſſign- able, 396 On the Judicial Principle able, except a juſt affection for his happineſs, guided by the perfection of knowledge If theſe incomparable requiſites are taken into the caſe, the proverbial maxim, Polent; non fit injuria, which is ſaid to be falſe in numberleſs inſtances, ſeems in this concluſively true. - S E CT I O N III. General ſubſtance of the foregoing obſervations —the concluſion which they ſeem to authorize. TAKEN in one view, then, the general ſub- ſtance of the former and the preſent obſervations ſtands thus. The Word and Works of God exemplify the real and diſtinct action of thoſe attributes, by which he vouchſafes mercy, and inflicts puniſh- ment; but without any preſumption, ſuggeſted ‘by appearances, that both of them have not a neceſſary operation ; ſo neceſſary, that finners may not preſume impunity, however penitents may hope for deliverance from the wrath to come. Juſt and true are all his ways; and the character and nature of rectitude is ſuch, as his meaſures delineate and exemplify it. There muſt, then, be no encouragement to found Redemption upon a principle, apparently the reverſe of that, on which God ſeems to have conducted his go- - Vernment. of Redemption. 397 vernment. And as we have no ground for ſup- poſing that rectitude would preſcribe, in any di- vine ſcheme, a proceeding oppoſite to that which it ſeems to have preſcribed in others, we can hardly preſume it conſiſtent with divine reëtitude, that the impunity of the guilty ſhould be in- cluded as an acceſſion in the reward of the Re- deemer. We ſeem to diſcern alſo in the courſe of the divine proceedings, from various examples, that the ſufferings of ſome perſons may, without any relation to ill-deſert in them, be properly penal for the ill-deſert of others. And conſidering this life as connected with another, and both to be in the view of God, though not of man, at the ſame time, we can no more pronounce that ſuch caſes contradićt divine reëtitude, than that other inequalities in the preſent adminiſtration of things infringe it. There appears, then, no ſufficient authority for calling it impoſſible, or preſuming it wrong, that ſufferings ſhould be laid on the fleſh of Chriſt, without any relation to his own innocence, on a penal conſideration of the ſins of mankind, as their cauſe. And upon conſent, re- ſulting, as it did in him, both from the perfection of that wiſdom, which acted principally in ad- juſting the ſcheme of Redemption, and diſcerned all along its every part and dependency, and, alſo, from the complete view of the glorious reward certainly appointed him, we ſeem forbidden to queſtion the rectitude of the merciful ſcheme. Jpon 398 On the Judicial Principle of Redemption. Upon the whole, then, from the Apoſtolical affertions, that “ God, ſending his own Son,” “condemned ſin in the fleſh,” and that Chriſt gave himſelf “a ranſom for all,” and died “ for “ the redemption of tranſgreſſions;” and from many expreſſions equivalent in each caſe; ſome may continue to think that Chriſt was judicially wounded for our tranſgreſſions, and that the pe- nal “chaſtiſement of our peace was upon him ;” and to this they will be the more readily diſpoſed, if it has been ſhewn that no juſt preſumption holds againſt the opinion they entertain. QN TH}. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST AND OF T H E B O D Y. O N T H E RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. S E C T I O N T. Credibility of the Witneſſes to Chriſt's Reſurrec- tion confirmed from their number—from their perſonal character—from the conſideration of the place, where they began their teſtimony— from the time when they began it. OUR bleſſed Lord delivered two diſtinét pro- miſes, that he would raiſe up himſelf, and that he would raiſe up all men, from the dead. The confidence we entertain that he will fulfill the ſecond reſults in a great meaſure from the evi- dence we have that he has fulfilled the firſt; and after we have found that his own reſurrection is ſufficiently atteſted, we may then humbly endea- vour to form the beſt ideas we can of the extent and ſenſe in which he may be expected to ac- compliſh the “redemption of our body” from death, D d As 4 O2 On the Reſurrečtion of Chriſt. As the reſurreótion of our Lord is a poſſible thing, and, if it happened, was aſcertained by ſenſible evidence, the credibility of the fact can- not be reaſonably reſiſted, if there are no ap- pearances of invalidity in that teſtimony, which was offered to ſupport it. That there are none, it may be eaſy to ſhew from ſome obvious conſi- derations. - I. The teſtimony, that is offered, has the greater weight from the very number of the witneſſes. “The thing was not done in a corner.” “He “was ſeen,” ſays St. Paul, “ of Cephas, then of “ the Twelve ; after that, he was ſeen of above “ five hundred brethren at once, and after that, “ he was ſeen of James, then of all the Apoſtles; “ laſt of all he was ſeen of me alſo.” In this de- tail, the argument in proof of Chriſt's reſurrec- tion plainly turns on the number of the witneſſes to it. Credit has, in ſome inſtances, been gained by the teſtimony of ſeveral intermediate vouch- ers, when it was poſſible to trace the whole of it upward to the ſource in the teſtimony of one, and that precarious. But the teſtimony delivered by the Apoſtles of Chriſt is not open to this ex- ception. Their language is, “This Jeſus hath “God raiſed up, whereof we all are witneſſes;” that is, all upon the ſame equal ground, which is implied in the queſtion of St. Paul, “Have not I “ſeen the Lord " And it may be added, to ſtrengthen the caſe, that their teſtimony was founded On the Reſurre&ion of Chriſt. 4O 3 founded upon the ſame ſenſible evidence vouch- ſafed and repeated at different times. There ſeems but one principle, which renders it poſſible to account for the univerſal agreement of ſo many in the whole of their teſtimony, Simplicity and conſiſtence are the genuine cha- racters of truth, whether it is aſſerted by one or by many. If any one, or any few, among the witneſſes had projected a ſcheme of impoſture, he or they would have perceived, as deceivers commonly do, that the probability of concealing the deceit muſt be proportionably leſs as the number that concerted it was greater; and, in the caſe before them, would have acted accord- ingly. But of this there is not the leaſt appear- ance; and as their number was large, and yet their agreement univerſal; and as the evidence, upon which each of them grounded their teſti- mony of Chriſt's reſurrection, was to them all equally and repeatedly ſenſible, it ſeems a rea- ſonable and indeed an unavoidable concluſion, that they have truly “teſtified of God that he “ raiſed up Chriſt.” II. The conſideration of their perſonal cha- racter may be alſo added to confirm their teſti- mony. They were virtuous men, and, even when almoſt entering upon their miniſtry, they were nothing more. Neither previous education, nor habits of life, had prepared them to conduct an impoſition upon the public with ſucceſs. Igno- rant of the arts of leading a multitude, and gain- D d 2 ing 4 O4 On the Reſurrection of Chriſt. ing the paſſions of men, they had no probability of obtaining credit to a ſtory, that claſhed with popular views, and with the prejudices of their times. In fact, they were ſo far from intending to work ſuch a revolution in the minds of their countrymen, that it was but commencing in their own. It was the irrefragable truth of the things they aſſerted, that ſlowly unſettled their deareſt prejudices, and inſtantly overcame their ſtrongeſt fears. Entire was the revolution it ſud- denly wrought in the temper of their minds. It expoſed them, as willing and unrepentant ſacri- fices, to linger in the ſevereſt ſufferings, ended only by miſerable death. Such a change, and ſuch in- vincible fortitude, in men of their previous prin- ciples and character, are irreconcileable with con- ſcious impoſture. Nothing could change them all out of equal weakneſs into equal ſtrength, in an inſtant, and ſo actuate them for a length of time, but the commanding ſenſe of duty, and a heart-felt convićtion that their teſtimony was true. III. The conſideration of the place, where the witneſſes began their teſtimony of Chriſt's reſur- rection, will alſo ſupport their credibility. If they had publiſhed the reſurrection of their Lord at firſt, as they did afterwards, in countries re- mote from Judaea, wherein it happened, ſuſpi- cion might have been entertained of a deſign in them to make advantage of that difficulty to examine their ſtory, which diſtance of place would On the Reſurreółion of Chriſt. 405 would occaſion. For in whatever degree the fa- cility of obtaining true information is leſſened, in the ſame proportion the probability of eſtab- liſhing falſehood will be increaſed. But they firſt aſſerted the reſurrection of Jeſus in that very city wherein it happened, and where, of courſe, any fraud or falſehood in their teſtimony might have been detected with greateſt eaſe and expe- dition. That proviſion which it would have in- diſpenſably required, if it had been falſe, was ſuperfluous, only becauſe it was true. IV. The credibility of the witneſſes to the reſurrection of Jeſus may alſo be ſupported by a conſideration of the Time when they began to deliver their teſtimony. If they had not publicly aſſerted the reſurrec- tion of their Maſter till a conſiderable time after it was ſaid to have happened, ſome ſuſpicion might have been incurred by ſuch heſitation and delay. Time and deliberation were neceſſary for them, it might have been ſaid, to put their ſcheme together, and adjuſt the ſeveral parts of it, that it might ſhew itſelf clear of all diſagreement, either of the witneſſes or the facts with each other. But they acted otherwiſe; after all the evidences of their Lord's reſurrection had been vouchſafed, which he intended to give them perſonally upon earth, ten days were ſcarcely elapſed before they publiſhed that Goſpel, which has ſafely ſtood the teſt of the moſt ſuſpicious ſcrutiny for many ages. But if it was poſſible that they ſhould D d 3 have 4O6 On the Reſurrection of Chriſt. have really formed in ſo ſhort a time a ſyſtem of falſehood, they could not have choſen a more un- favourable ſeaſon for attempting to introduce it. It would have been for them a ſurer way, to have waited till ſome abatement had taken place in the vigilance and inveteracy of their foes. But there was nothing of this in their proceeding. To deliberate long, or indeed at all, upon the ſyſtem of their teſtimony, was not neceſſary for them, becauſe they were not the authors of it; and as they knew it to be true, and had diſcarded all fears for their perſonal ſafety, it was natural that they ſhould publiſh it, as they did, without delay, even among bitter adverſaries. Thus, from the number and the character of thoſe that aſſerted the reſurreótion of Chriſt, in the place where, and ſo near the time when, it happened, it ſeems to be clear that they are not falſe witneſſes, and that Chriſt really roſe from the dead. O N T H ſº RESURRECTION OF THE BODY. S E. CT I O N II. General Reſurreółion to be inferred from that of Chriſt—reply to the objection that the Reſur- rection of the body is needleſs—in what light the body appears on Chriſtian principles—Re- ſurrection of it not needleſs in the caſe of the Impenitent—in that of the Penitent neceſſary. THE foregoing circumſtances, and any other that are commonly offered in ſupport of the Apoſtolical teſtimony that God raiſed up Chriſt from the dead, will alſo have ſome effect in con- firming the great inference from his reſurrection, that he is “ the firſt-fruits of them that" ſleep. For it is a violence to break the relation between them ; “If Chriſt be preached that he roſe from “ the dead, how ſay ſome among you, that there “ is no reſurrection of the dead '' D d 4 The 408 On the Reſurrection of the Body. The objections that have been urged in every age againſt this inference ſeem to be founded chiefly on one principle. It was adopted very early from the heathen philoſophy, and has al- ways been adopted by thoſe who were deſirous of accommodating the word of God to the wiſ- dom of this world. This principle placed the human body in the light of a mere incumbrance, an impure and abject thing. But that philoſophy which is properly Chriſtian, and treats of human nature with due deference to Scriptural informa- tion, places the body in a very different view. It is the language of the inſpired Writer, “Know “ ye not that your bodies are the temples of the “Holy Ghoſt " And greatly will the body riſe in eſteem upon the reflection, that, “as the chil- “dren are partakers of fleſh and blood,” the Son of God “likewiſe took part of the ſame,” and, after living upon earth in their likeneſs, aſcended up to heaven in faſhion as a man ; and, as he is gone thither to reign in the fleſh now, ſhall ſo come again in like manner, that is, in the fleſh, to judge the world hereafter. If, then, our opinion of the body be adjuſted to Scriptural principles, we ſhall be at no loſs for an anſwer to that objection, which Celſus drew from the old philoſophy, and ſome moderns have revived in different ſhapes, againſt the reſurrection of the body, that it is entirely needleſs. We may reply, upon the authority and in the very inference of St. Paul, “The body is for the “Lord, On the Reſurre&ion of the Body. 400 “Lord, and the Lord for the body;” and “God “ hath both raiſed up the Lord, and will alſo “raiſe up us, by his own power.” But though, in anſwer to this objection, as far as it may affect the caſe of the righteous ſingly, it might be ſufficient to aſſert the real dignity of the body, on Chriſtian principles, yet another conſideration may be added, namely, that the ends of the divine government, and the accom- pliſhment of the ſcheme of redemption, ſeem to require and imply an univerſal reſurrection of the fleſh. - With reſpect to the Impenitent, who are ob- jects of the divine vengeance only, it may be obſerved, that as they ſerve the luſts of the body, and pervert it to an inſtrument of unrighteouſ- neſs in this life, the judgment would be as juſt as it would be ſignal, if God ſhould make the body, in another life alſo, an inſtrument of mi- ſery to them, and an inlet to none but painful and grievous ſenſations, to ſhew them their ſin in their puniſhment. The Scriptures ſuggeſt and authorize this expectation, by awakening in us the fear of him, “who hath power to caſt both “ body and ſoul into hell.” So that there ſeems no reaſon to repreſent the reſurrection of the body as needleſs even in the caſe of the Impeni- tent, who under the government of God are to undergo the “tribulation and anguiſh” which he has denounced. J3ut the caſe of the Penitent, for whom, as heirs 410 On the Reſurreółion of the Body. heirs of the promiſes, the ſcheme of redemption was ordained, ſeems plainly to require the reſur- rečtion of the body. For, unleſs they, who “ have been planted together in the likeneſs” of the death of Chriſt, ſhall alſo, as he is “ the firſt- “fruits of them that ſlept,” be raiſed “ in the “ likeneſs of his reſurreótion,” redemption will not ſeem verified to the full extent of the pro- miſe. For, as the divine denunciation to our firſt father that ſinned, and in him to all man- kind, ran in the terms, “ Duſt thou art, and to “duſt ſhalt thou return,” ſo alſo the Holy Spirit prophetically reverſes the caſe; “Awake, and “ſing, ye that dwell in the duſt.” Accordingly, the redemption of the body from the ſentence of death, that was “written” in it, is called that “adoption” for which we “groan within our- “ſelves.” And as Chriſt taught and exempli- fied the redemption of the body from death, and has promiſed it a real intereſt of its own in the bleſſedneſs of heaven, he may be ſaid in this ob- vious and endearing ſenſe to have “brought life “ and immortality to light.” The hope of a fu- ture life had been entertained before his coming; but it was chiefly grounded on the natural argu- ments for the immortality of the ſoul, not only without any ſpecial attention, but even with an indifference, to the body. But that intereſt, which God had vouchſafed to give it in his promiſes, was firſt unfolded and ſecured by our Lord. So that-the “bondage of corruption,” to which the body - On the Reſurrection of the Body. 411 body is ſubject, which ſuggeſted the obječtion that the reſurrection of it was needleſs, is the very principle that ſhews it to be neceſſary. Ac- cording to the Apoſtle, it is ſubjected in hope, and waiteth for “ the manifeſtation of the ſons “ of God, to wit, the redemption of our body.” Upon Chriſtian principles, then, the body can- not be excluded from a real ſhare in the pro- miſes of God, nor can the ſcheme of redemp- tion be made conſiſtent with itſelf, and complete in all its parts, without a real reſurrection of that part of our nature, which died and was buried. S E C T I O N III. Reply to the objećtion from changes, by death, and by a body of glory put on—of identity, God alone a perfeół, but man an imperfeół, eac- ample—identity of body, under a faſhion of glory put on, eacemplified in the transfiguration of our Lord—in the caſe of thoſe who ſhall not ſleep, but be changed. BUT here another exception is made. Changes that will take place in the body, even by death and the conſequences of it, and much more by the converſion of the corruptible and natural body into an incorruptible and glorious body, are 412 On the Reſurrection of the Body. are repreſented as total ; and hence it is con- tended that the raiſed body cannot be the ſame with that which was buried. This objection, in both its points, turns upon the difficulties of the caſe; but againſt demon- ſtrations, if any are attainable, they are of no validity. The neceſſary enquiry here will be, whether theſe changes in the body are either of them ſubverſive of identity in it. Accordingly, I ſhall endeavour to ſhew from ačtual fact and Scriptural examples, that the change of the body from “vile” to “glorious,” and the change made in it by death, do not either of them pre- vent the identity of it from ſubſiſting really, as in preceding life. By the word, identity, we commonly expreſs two very diſſimilar ideas. Whatever has not undergone any degree of change, or not ſo much of it as thereby to become another and new thing, we indifferently call the ſame. Of the firſt ſenſe of the term, God without “variableneſs or ſhadow of turning,” eſſentially as well as morally “the ſame yeſterday, to-day, “ and for ever,” is alone a juſt example. To him we may apply it with ſtrict preciſion. But to no other being, in all the varieties of ſublu- nary nature, can it be applied in this ſenſe, or in any, that is not conſiſtent with certain degrees of change. When identity is attributed to the human body for the ſhorteſt period of time, the expreſſion is uſed, not in an abſolute, but a re- lative On the Reſurrection of the Body. 413 lative ſenſe. Of ſtrićt and philoſophical iden- tity the human body is no example for any two periods of time ; ſince changes, certainly partial, and nearly entire, ſome ſenſible, ſome inſenſible, confeſſedly take place in it continually during life. From preſent appearances the rule ought to be taken for determining the identity of the raiſed and buried body. Although “our earthly “houſe of this tabernacle” is diſſolving and dy- ing daily, and cannot be ſupported without di- vers acceſſions incorporated in it from time to time, yet there is a ſenſe, though not a ſtrićt and philoſophical one, in which it continues aćtually the ſame body. And ſince, under theſe appearances, change and identity are experiment- ally conſiſtent in the human body, in what de- grees, beyond what we have yet actually ſeen, they may or may not be made compatible by in- finite power, we can ſcarcely preſume to ſay. At leaſt it may be obſerved, that there is nothing in preſent appearances, that can be preſumed to diminiſh the evidence ariſing from Scriptural ex- amples, if any occur applicable to the caſe. From real inſtances, then, in Scripture, it may be ſhewn that a faſhion of glory put on will not change the body ſo far, as to prevent it from continuing the ſame in another life that it was in this, in that ſenſe in which it can be truly called the ſame body from time to time be- fore death. That a body of glory may, “through the “ mighty 414 On the Reſurre&tion of the Body. “mighty working” of God, be made conſiſtent with the ſameneſs of the human body, ſeems evident from the transfiguration of our Lord, and from the appearance in glory of Moſes and Elias with him, both diſtinctly cognizable by the three diſciples in the “ holy mount.” In another place I have endeavoured to ſhew at ſome length, that in the three Apoſtles, who were then preſent, the knowledge of their Lord ſubſiſted before and during that vi- ſion of glory. From the two, who appeared in glory with their Lord, they diſtinguiſhed him, and them alſo from each other. An ex- traordinary change in features, perſon, and rai- ment took place in the body of Chriſt, and, even when clothed with his body of glory, they hailed him Lord and Maſter. In him, and in Moſes and Elias, a form of glory aſſumed did not infringe their cognizable identity; under a change from vile to glorious bodies, all appeared and were known to be the ſame. Referring then to as many of the reflections there made, as may be concerned here, I proceed to other Scriptural caſes. Another example ſeems to be implied in the particular caſe of thoſe perſons, who ſhall be alive and remain at the ſecond coming of Chriſt. The Apoſtle aſſerts, that “we ſhall not all ſleep, “but we ſhall all be changed,” that is, from corruptible to incorruptible, from mortal to immortal. In all ſuch perſons it muſt be ad- - mitted On the Reſurreółion of the Body. 41 5 mitted that the identity of the body will ſubſiſt really, till they are inveſted with glory. But if they will not retain the ſame bodies after this change, which they had before it, then it muſt be ſaid that their bodies will be extinét, and re- duced to the ſleep of death; but this will bring them under the common caſe of other men, and deſtroy the very exception which is made by the Apoſtle. His meaning was, that in them the exiſtence of the body would not be interrupted at all, which is in fact to ſay that the identity thereof would be preſerved, although it were changed. So that it ſeems the body will not ceaſe to be the ſame after its change to a faſhion of glory, in like manner as it did not ceaſe to be the ſame after the continual changes that befell it during life. As a right apprehenſion of this matter ap- pears of ſome importance, let me endeavour to make myſelf fully underſtood, by repeating my conception of it in other terms more conciſely, In every perſon of that particular deſcription, life muſt continue in the ſame body till the time of its change to a “glorious body;” and iſ it ſhould be ſaid, that each of them then re- ceived another and a new body, it muſt be ſaid too that they ſeverally die, for the ſleep of death is the extinction of the body. But the Apoſtle expreſsly ſpeaks of thoſe who do not ſleep, and therefore neceſſarily of thoſe who retain thence- forwards the ſame bodies which they had till then. 416 On the Reſurrečtion of the Body. then, however “ clothed upon” with glory. This particular caſe put by the Apoſtle may therefore be called an example to the purpoſe before us, as it implies that the change from corruptible to incorruptible is conſiſtent with the identity of the body. SECTION IV. Reply to the objection, that changes by death will prevent the identity of the raiſed and buried body—Scriptural caſes and examples, THUS one part of the objećtion, that the change of the natural body to a body of glory is incon- fiſtent with the identity of it, appears contra- dićted by Scriptural caſes; and that the other part of the objection, namely, that the change by death and its conſequences irrevocably breaks. the identity of the body, ſeems as evidently to diſagree with Scriptural facts and principles. I. The firſt example I might produce is that of Chriſt himſelf, for as he gave “many infalli- “ble proofs” that he had brought again from the grave the ſame body, which had been depo- ſited in it, the identity of the raiſed and buried body was actually exemplified in him. And as he “is the firſt-fruits of them that ſlept,” and the reſt of the dead will be conformed to his ". likeneſs, - on the Reſurrection of the Body. 417. likeneſs, the caſe of our Lord, as far as it goes, is an inſtance to the preſent purpoſe. But as he “ ſaw no corruption” his reſurrection may not perhaps, in every poſſible extent, aſcertain the point to be proved, that change by death will not prevent the identity of the raiſed and buried body. II. A ſtronger inſtance occurs in the caſe of Lazarus. That the diſſolution of his body had advanced to a very ſenſible degree, is plain from the words of Martha; and her apprehenſion, that this circumſtance would impede “the mighty “working” of him who was “the reſurrection “ and the life,” was corrected by his mild re- buke ; “ Said I not unto thee, that, if thou “wouldeſt believe, thou ſhouldeſt ſee the glory “ of God?” He ſpake, and the waſted body in the grave heard his voice; and the conſolation of the ſiſter, the wonder and converſion of the people, and the reſentment of the prieſts, had all no aſſignable ground but this, that Lazarus lived again in the ſame body, in which he had lived before. And the words of Chriſt to Martha, juſt cited, ſeem to imply and eſtabliſh the point here defended, that, notwithſtanding the change of the body by death, the glory of God will be ſeen in the revival of the ſame body that died. III. Another example will verify the princi- ple in a greater extent. St. Matthew relates that “ the graves were opened, and many dead F. C. t “ bodies 418 On the Reſurre&ion of the Body. “ bodies of ſaints, which ſlept, aroſe, and came “out of the graves, after” Chriſt's “reſurrec- “tion, and went into the holy city, and ap- “peared unto many.” The reduction of the body to its original elements had proceeded very far in many of theſe caſes, and probably in ſome was completed. Yet the bodies “ that came out “ of the graves, and appeared unto many,” gave them a ſenſible recognition of ſaints that ſlept. And this effect apparently implies that the bodies, which came out of the graves, were cognizably the ſame which had previouſly exiſted upon earth. So that in whatſoever degree change by death may be ſuppoſed to have enſued, there ſeems no ſufficient reaſon to preſume it will prevent the reſurrection of that very body, which had previouſly been committed to the grave. IV. In the preceding example, ſenſible recog- nition was an effect of identity in the bodies that appeared. It may then be added here in the caſe of all mankind, that if mutual recogni- tion has a place in a future life, it becomes evident that the ſame body which died will be raiſed again. And agreeably to the natural hope of all men in all ages, the language and analogies of Scripture lead us to expect this mutual recogni- tion in another life". * It appears from Scripture that the ſtate of men in a future life will be a ſtate of ſociety. “Many ſhall come from the eaſt and weſt, “ and ſhall fit down with Abraham and Iſaac and Jacob in the king- “ dom On the Reſurreółion of the Body. 419 The patriarch Jacob reſted his hope upon this principle; “I ſhall go down to the grave to my “dom of heaven.” The angels at the end of the world will be com- manded to “gather together the tares, and bind them in bundles to “burn them,” and “to gather the wheat” into the barn of their Lord. See alſo Matt. xxv. 32. St. Paul inſiſts upon this expectation as a ſource of conſolation and joy ; “God hath raiſed up us together, and “ hath made us fit together in heavenly places in Chriſt Jeſus." He ſpeaks elſewhere of “ the innumerable company of the ſpirits of juſt “men made perfect, and the aſſembly of the Church of the firſt- “ born, who are written in heaven.” See alſo Rev. vii. 13. and a Diſſertation of Dr. Price on this ſubjećt. Nor can it be objećted that, as there are “many manſions” in the kingdom of heaven, the inequalities of human virtue will be likely to prevent the aſſociation of the bleſſed in a future life. From inſtances upon earth we may know that God beſtows upon the heart of every. individual, in a ſtate of aſſociation, more or leſs happineſs propor- tionate to the degree of his virtue. There ſeems then little reaſon to conclude that inequalities in human virtue, which may occaſion their being rewarded unequally, will prevent their being rewarded together. The contrary may rather be preſumed from the words of Chriſt; after he had told the diſciples, “In my Father's houſe are many man- “ſions,” he added, “I go to prepare a place for you, that where I “am, there ye may be alſo.” If there were differences in the virtue and faith of the diſciples, which ſeveral particulars may induce us to ſuppoſe, the aſſurance of Chriſt, that they together ſhould be with him in heaven, will appear of deciſive weight. The firſt and the laſt in the kingdom of heaven are alſo expreſſions which ſeem to imply that men will be aſſociated there in a ſtate of happineſs. To this confideration we may alſo add, that the ſacred Writers fre- quently repreſent the human mind as looking back from another life on that which had preceded. The queſtion, “Have we not prophe- “ fied in thy name, and in thy name caſt out devils 2" implies a re- membrance of things and actions preceding: and in another place, “Lord, when ſaw we thee an-hungered and fed thee, or thirſty and gave “ thee drink 2" the reality of certain actions is diſputed, becauſe they were not remembered. - Theſe conſiderations, that the ſtate of men in a future life will be ſocial, and that they will be then the ſame in mind or ſoul that they E e 2 Were: 420 On the Reſurrection of the Body. “ ſon.” “I ſhall go to him,” ſaith David, on the death of his beloved child. “I know that “ he ſhall riſe again,” ſaith Martha, reſpecting her buried brother. Upon a preſumption of meeting and recognizing the lamented relative, the remark of each ſuggeſts comfort that is real. But if from their words the hope of mutual re- cognition be excluded, how poor will be the re- maining amount of their reflections The Patri- arch can then be underſtood to ſay only that he ſhould die, as his ſon had died; and the refle&tion of David will import no more than this, that ſorrow for his child ought now to be reſtrained, becauſe it could not recall him ; “I “ſhall go to him, but he ſhall not return to me.” Martha muſt be alſo ſuppoſed to mean only, that her brother would indeed riſe again, though parted from her for ever. The queſtion, “Whoſe wife ſhall ſhe be of the “ ſeven º’’ implied that the relation of the ſeven and their relićt would be recollected, and their perſons mutually recognized ; and the reply of our Lord gives no diſcouragement to that idea. Theſe are caſes of affection, which is a parti- cular branch of that charity, that “now abideth,” and “never faileth ;” and as it “now abideth'' were before, ſeem to obviate any preſumption againſt the credibility of their mutual recognition ; and, if that can be proved, it will be- come incredible that they will not ſubſiſt in a future life the ſame alſo in body that they are in the preſent. by On the Reſurrection of the Body. 421 by means of perſonal knowledge interchanged between men, ſo, as it “never faileth,” there ſeems reaſon to expect it will revive hereafter by mutual recognition. The rich man, and Abraham, and Lazarus, in the parable are repreſented as remembering the events and intereſts of previous life, and recog- nizing the perſon of each other. In the book of Revelations it is ſaid reſpecting our Lord, “Every eye ſhall ſee him, and they alſo which “pierced him ;” the prophet alſo had foretold, “They ſhall look on him whom they pierced;” and our Lord thus prays, “Father, I will that “ they, whom thou haſt given me, may be with “ me where I am, that they may behold my “glory.” Such language is clear upon the prin- ciple of mutual recognition, but not without it. The ſame may be ſaid of the words, “Ye ſhall ſee “Abraham, and Iſaac, and Jacob, and all the pro- “ phets, in the kingdom of God;” they imply that Abraham, Iſaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, will be cognizable in another world by the ſenſes of others, in the ſame manner as our Lord, and Moſes, and Elias, all appearing in glory, and two of them long after death, were ſenſibly known and diſtinguiſhed by the Apoſtles in the “holy mount.” The words of St. Paul to the Theſſalonians, “What is our hope and crown of rejoicing? Are “ not even ye, in the preſence of our Lord Jeſus “Chriſt at his coming?” and, “He which raiſed E C 3 “up 422 On the Reſurrection of the Body. “up the Lord Jeſus, ſhall raiſe us up alſo by “Jeſus, and preſent us with you,” proceed upon the firm expectation which he had of meeting and recognizing his converts in the preſence of the Lord, after the reſurrection of the dead. If, then, this mutual recognition in a future life, which has ever been the favourite hope of mankind, is alſo, as it appears to be, the doćtrine of the Scriptures, it ſeems ſcarcely poſſible to ſuppoſe that death infers a total change, and that the body raiſed in another life, will not be the ſame that lived in this b. - The principle therefore, of which theſe few, out of many, Scriptural evidences have been pro- duced, may be thus expreſſed in all its parts. As actual fact evinces that continual changes in the body, which take place now, are conſiſtent with the identity thereof from the beginning to the end of life; ſo alſo the Scriptures not only intimate, but alſo exemplify, that neither a change to glory, nor any degree of change by death, will prevent its riſing again in another life no leſs the ſame body, than it was ſo in this. What an opening, then, what an enlargement is here given to our views by the Chriſtian philo- ſophy of man There is no refuſe, there is no- * See Matt. x. 28. If by the deſtrućtion of the body and the ſoul in hell the miſery of man will be completed, it ſeems reaſonable to preſume that by the life of the body and the ſoul in heaven his hap- pineſs alſo will be accompliſhed. - . . * thing On the Reſurrection of the Body. 423 thing outcaſt in our nature, but the divine go- vernment and promiſes reſpect both the outward and inward man ; and what all ſeverally are as men, and friends, and brethren, in this life, that they will revive in the preſence of God, and in the recognition of each other, in the next; and whatever contributed to dignify and to endear our firſt exiſtence, ſhall alſo be renewed in another, and then be improved to conſtitute our glory and bleſſedneſs for ever. Happy for man, if this conſideration be permitted to work to the purpoſe of God; if either by animating the vir- tuous in the ſtruggles of duty, or alarming ſinners in the midſt of danger, it conducts all to ſuch a ſtate of religious improvement, that in every con- dition, every infirmity, and even at the cloſe of life, they may cordially appropriate that affur- ance, in which the religious ſage reſted; “I “know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he “ſhall ſtand at the latter day upon the earth ; “ and though after my ſkin worms deſtroy this “body, yet in my fleſh ſhall I ſee God, whom I “ſhall ſee for myſelf, and mine eyes ſhall behold, “ and not another “.” * Though the Jewiſh interpreters and Grotius, Bp. Patrick and Dr. Hody, did not apply this paſſage to a future reſurre&tion, yet it ſeems clear that it ought to be ſo applied. See Sherlock on Proph. Differt. ii. p. 229. 3. e 'i “T H E RESURRECTION OF THE BODY DEDUCED FROM THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, AND ILLUSTRATED FROM HIS TRANSFIGURATION. A. D IS COURSE RESURRECTION OF THE BODY. PHILIPPIANS iii. 2 I. Who ſhall change our vile Body, that it may be faſhioned like unto his glorious Body. IN theſe words St. Paul ſeems to refer as fully and diſtinctly to the reſurrection, as in any paſ- ſage of his Epiſtles: they are declaratory, not only of a reſurrection from the dead, but alſo of a reſurrection of the body. Although theſe terms may be conſidered by many as equivalent, yet ſome have endeavoured to eſtabliſh a material diſtinction between them, and have accordingly defended the notion of a reſurreótion from the dead, independently of the conſtituent fact, a re- ſurrection of the body. But theſe words ſeem to 428 A Diſcourſe on the to contradićt their theory; and a particular en- quiry into their meaning may poſſibly afford ſome clear inſight into the nature of that great truth, to which they are ſuppoſed to relate. Now the faſhion of Chriſt's glorious body, if it be made the ſtandard of that glory which ſhall be impreſſed on the perſon of man by the change of his vile body, muſt be, it ſhould ſeem, the faſhion of Chriſt's raiſed body. But conſequences can never be true, if premiſes are falſe: we can- not reſemble the body of Chriſt's reſurrection, if Chriſt be not riſen—for if he “be not riſen, then “ is there no reſurrection.” Theſe two points, therefore, demand properly ſome reflections, in- troductory to that application, for which, proba- bly, the Apoſtle intended the words of the text. According to a common remark, the credibi- lity of the whole Chriſtian ſcheme turns upon the certainty of Chriſt's reſurrection. That we find this miracle confirmed with ſtronger evi- dence than any other, therefore, ſeems not the effect of accident; and the appearance there is, that the providence of God has been particularly vigilant in this reſpect, may be received, in the judgment of a few, as no weak argument in ſup- port of the fact. There are two ways of eſtabliſhing the credi- bility of facts; either by demonſtrating the ſtrength of that teſtimony, which is produced in their favour, or by ſhewing the weakneſs of thoſe arguments, which are inſiſted on with a VIeW Reſurrection of the Body. 429 view to impeach their credit. At preſent ſome ſhort uſe will be made of both theſe methods. It muſt be admitted, even by unbelievers, that the individual Perſon, whom Chriſtians diſtin- guiſh by the titles of God and Saviour, was really put to death, and, after his ſuffering, that his body was openly depoſited in the tomb. They will alſo grant, what it is indeed againſt their cauſe to deny, that every human precaution was taken to make his “ ſepulchre ſure.” All theſe things happened at a time when Jeruſalem was filled with a crowd of worſhippers, aſſembled for the purpoſe of celebrating the Paſſover. It was nevertheleſs boldly aſſerted by a few, that this ſame Perſon was returned to life, and that he “ſhewed himſelf openly” among men, confirm- ing the fact of his reſurrection by every poſſible evidence. This appears to be a fair ſtate of the point, in ſupport of which, no other conceſſions, but theſe, are ſuppoſed to be neceſſary. For thoſe proofs, which are yet wanting, we are content to depend upon the teſtimony of thoſe men, who declare, that they ſeverally ſaw and heard him, after he was riſen, and were continually favoured with the moſt palpable aſſurances of his return to life. Among the chief of theſe may be reckoned that Apoſtle, upon whom, as upon a rock, the Church of Chriſt ſhould be built. He was the moſt zealous of thoſe, who firſt aſſerted their JLord's 430 A Diſcourſe on the Lord's reſurrection. He had made an early viſit to the ſepulchre, and upon “ ſtooping down,” and “ſeeing the linen clothes lying,” without finding the body, we read that he “departed, “wondering in himſelf.” If he had embarked in any ſcheme of fraud, he needed not to repair to the ſepulchre for intelligence; and if any ſuch deſign had been adopted, and carried into exe- cution, by the diſciples, it was ſurely aſtoniſhing, that the principal among them ſhould be unac- quainted either with their ſcheme, or their ſuc- ceſs. There appears then no danger in reſting the whole on this ſingle point—It is enough if St. Peter uniformly perſiſted to aſſert his maſter's reſurrection. There could be no room either for credulity on the one hand, or fraud on the other. What he had perſonally ſeen, depended upon a ſpecies of evidence neceſſarily exempt from the danger of miſinformation. We muſt take his ſenſes for our vouchers, and ſhall, it is appre- hended, feel ourſelves obliged to believe their re- port. - No point is herein taken for granted, which it is conceived eaſy to deny. The matter aſſerted by this Apoſtle was not any effect dependent on the operation of his underſtanding; if it had been, he might, it muſt be confeſſed, judge im- properly—he might have been deceived. But it was an object of his outward ſenſes, a poſitive and perſpicuous fact. It was not the doubtful reſult Reſurrection of the Body. 43 | reſult of inference or argument—he had no al- ternative ; whether he was credulous or obſti- nate, he muſt believe it. Nothing more, then, ſeems to be wanted, than the aſſurance that he was ſincere, and that he had really ſeen that which he ſo ſtrenuouſly aſ- ſerted. The experience of all thoſe who de- clared the reſurrection of Chriſt had been ſuffi- cient to convince them, that the prejudices of their countrymen were highly unfavourable to their ſtory. The miniſtry of their Maſter had, even before their own eyes, ſubjected him to a cruel death, which they were all even afraid to behold, and much more to ſhare. From the ex- ample of their Lord, they muſt expect the like ſanguinary perſecution, if they ſhould dare to aſſert his reſurrection. The bare apprehenſion of ſuffering had driven them all into flight, and had induced St. Peter to deny his Maſter in the moſt violent terms of abjuration. And this Apo- ſtle was afterwards particularly aſſured, by the expreſs predićtion of his Maſter, that an avowal of the truth would expoſe him to the pains of a bitter death. When he gave forth his teſtimo- ny under ſuch apprehenſion, it might be ſaid, ſuch certainty of ſuffering, as this, his ſincerity can hardly be queſtioned. Since very few will lay down their lives, even for the truth, it muſt be unreaſonable to imagine, that St. Peter would ſtruggle with thoſe very fears which had ſo lately ſubdued him, and brave that death, from which 432 A Diſcourſe on the which he had fled before, in ſupport of a wilful and deliberate falſehood. It is not intended to infer, that the ſufferings of St. Peter, and of the other diſciples, are alone ſufficient proofs of the truth of their ſtory: but they ſeem to prove one thing unqueſtionably, that the diſciples were ſincere, and that they meant to aſſert no more than the truth ; and then, if the fact they reported depended on their ſenſes, which could not, in the preſent inſtance, be eaſily miſled, it appears not unfair to conclude, that their report is true. Theſe few remarks appear ſufficiently ſtrong to eſtabliſh theſe three poſitions: that if St. Peter and the diſciples converſed with Chriſt after his death, they could not be miſtaken in his identity; and, that it was their own firm belief, that they had converſed with him after his death; and there- fore, that Chriſt did really riſe from the dead. The dedućtion thus briefly inſiſted on, and eſtabliſhed by many much more ably, preſſes with too much force upon the mind to be eaſily reſiſted. When direct contradićtion could hardly be ventured upon, this inference has been aſ- failed at a diſtance, and attempts have been made to weaken its credit, by reſources drawn from philoſophical theory. Since the reſtoration of a dead body to life contradićts the poſitive laws of nature, an unanſwerable objection, as ſome ima- gine, ſtands in the way. The general and regu- lar tenor of nature's operations, in reſpect of the dead, Reſurre&ion of the Body. 43.3 dead, will overthrow the credibility of any fact, that contradićts it, if ſupported only by human teſtimony. This is indeed a formidable objec- tion, and tears up all our evidence by the roots. But, if a reſurrection of Chriſt's body, as break- ing the regularity of nature, is therefore incredi- ble, ſo is alſo the raiſing of the widow's ſon by Elijah, and of the Shunamite's child by Eliſha. Theſe miracles were wrought by the power of God, upon the prayer of men, who were received as prophets by the Jews themſelves. If, then, God interfered to prove the heavenly miſſion of Elijah and Eliſha, by recalling a dead body to life at their requeſt, there can be no great reaſon to ſuppoſe he would not work the like miracle, to eſtabliſh the credit of any other prophet, whom it might pleaſe him to ſend into the world. No evidence, then, againſt ſuch a fact can be fairly drawn from the courſe of nature, in reſpect of the dead; the remaining queſtion will be ſimply, whether the fact aſſerted be falſe or true. This anſwer may perhaps have ſome weight with the Jew, who might determine, at all ad- ventures, to retain his acknowledgment of the prophets. But modern unbelievers are not ſo eaſy. To them it may be anſwered, that the general regularity of nature, in all her opera- tions concerning the dead, and this inſtance of departure from her laws, are alike the objećts of human ſenſes. Men ſee and know that the dead paſſively poſſeſs their graves; men alſo have ſeen F f and 43.4 A Diſcourſe on the and known, that Jeſus Chriſt returned from death to life. Human evidence is admitted as concluſive in ſupport of the firſt propoſition, but it is refuſed in proof of the ſecond. But, ſince the experience of any individual, during his own ſhort abode upon earth, carries very little evi- dence, that the courſe of nature, in reſpect of the dead, was always as unchangeable as he has ſeen it ; to conclude that a reſurreótion never hap- pened, becauſe it has not fallen under his obſer- vation, ſeems particularly unfair. When articles of faith become the objects of enquiry, it is the duty of each Chriſtian to de- clare upon what proofs he is a believer, and to offer thus a reaſon for his own faith. What has been now urged appears to me ſufficient to awaken all, who do not endeavour to ſhut their eyes againſt Scriptural light. There is no reaſon, therefore, to inſiſt upon many other points, that meet us at our firſt view of the queſtion. It is enough to obſerve upon the venal teſtimony of the ſleeping band, that they have omitted one point of evidence to finiſh their ſtory. They ſhould have teſtified, (and they were full as good witneſſes of this fact as of the other,) that the Diſciples, who had ſtolen the remains of their maſter, completed the cheat by reanimating his body. For want of this one material point, they have unfortunately left it to be concluded, that, although the ſepulchre was robbed by the hand of man, yet the body of Chriſt, Reſurrection of the Body. 435 Chriſt, thus forcibly carried away, was raiſed again into life by the hand of God. If, then, as Chriſtians preſume, the body of their Saviour was raiſed from the dead, they have a well-founded right to expect the con- ſequences of his reſurrection. Every page of that holy Book, in which the great Worker of this miracle hath conveyed his promiſes to the ſons of men, will afford to all ſincere enquirers a clear conception of thoſe advantages, which they ſhall hereafter enjoy as the effects of it. They will ſoon feel their minds inflamed with the higheſt warmth of affection; they will break out, with St. Peter, in that rapturous exclamation ex- cited by this animating ſubject; “Bleſſed be “ the God and Father of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, “who, according to his abundant mercy, hath “begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the “ reſurreótion of Chriſt from the dead, to an in- “heritance incorruptible.” But the bleſfings, the “lively hope” of which is ſo tranſporting, are not natives of this cold world. Our preſent cor- ruptible inheritance, this a duo tº Tazewºzews, ſhall therefore be ſucceeded by an incorruptible ſtate, that ſo, “as in" the firſt “Adam all die,” in the ſecond Adam, in like manner, all ſhould “ be “ made alive.” In truth, there appears, on either ſide, whether the reſurreótion of Chriſt be admitted or denied, little neceſſity to bring evidence in ſupport of the conſequence. The minds of thoſe, who have F f 2 ſub- 436 A Diſcourſe on the ſubmitted to the credibility of the leading fact, will hardly entertain an objection to the admiſ- fion of the inference, the reſurreótion of the dead: and they, who deny the principal point, will never be perſuaded to bear the concluſion. Believers will readily be convinced, that, if Chriſt be indeed “ the firſt-fruits of them that ſleep,” the whole harveſt ſhall in like manner be conſe- crated—They will be aſſured, that he cannot properly be ſtiled the “firſt-fruits” of thoſe things, which ſhall not be made like him. They will be confident, that, as they are buried with him now “in the likeneſs of his death,” they ſhall alſo be raiſed with him hereafter “ in the “ likeneſs of his reſurreótion:” and becauſe “fleſh “ and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” that therefore, neceſſarily, “thoſe that ſleep in “Jeſus ſhall God bring with him.” Theſe few reflections, tending to vindicate the doctrine of our Lord's reſurrection, and our own, are occaſioned by the looſe and general interpre- tation of St. Paul's words, which ſtand at the head of this Diſcourſe. But if they are only thus generally explained, it is not improbable that they will be deſpoiled of their moſt impor- tant meaning. I proceed therefore to remark on them with another view, and to enquire more particularly what may be their genuine applica- tion. In the ſenſe hitherto aſſigned to them, I have been ſheltered by many and great authori- ties; but in that which will follow, if a miſtake IS Reſurrection of the Body. 437 is made, I ſhall, it is to be feared, have the mor- tification to err alone. The literal conſtruction of St. Paul's words would run thus: Who ſhall transfigure the body of our humiliation, that it may become conformal to the body of his glory. At firſt view this may perhaps appear no ma- terial variation from the tenor of the common tranſlation; and, by a figure much in uſe among the ſacred writers, the uſual verſion might be defended. But there is perhaps ſome reaſon to imagine, that the interpretation now offered ei- ther ſaves, or conveys more ſtrongly, the ſpirit and application of this animated paſſage, which the admiſſion of the figure might, it is probable, obſcure or impair. For indeed, the ſtriking con- traſt between the body of our humiliation, and the body of his glory, requires to be accurately and diſtinétly marked. - What the body of our humiliation is, what are the properties and nature of it, may be eaſily diſcovered: but what is the body of his glory, what is the character and faſhion of it, is not ſo obvious. It would be ſcarcely reaſonable to ſuppoſe, that this great Apoſtle would direct the eyes of his Philippian converts to a ſtandard, of which they were not able to form’ſome idea: he would hardly offer to their minds a compariſon of two things, unleſs it had been in their power to ac- quire ſome previous knowledge of both. But F f 3 they, 4.38 A Diſcourſe on the they, and all ſucceeding Chriſtians, enjoy alike the liberty of drawing information, in this re- ſpect, from the ſame pure ſource. To their fenſes, and to our own, the body of Chriſt's glory hath appeared—the keen eye of faith has fol- lowed him into the mount of viſion, and beheld him there transfigured. f* - It is not improbable, then, that theſe two facts may be nearly allied. An enquiry into this alliance may throw light on the queſtion of the reſurrection ; and, by preſenting us with ſome material truths concerning the nature of that miracle, may poſſibly induce a perſuaſion, that the reference of the transfiguration to it is natu- ral and pertinent. But before any inferences are made from that relation, now ſaid to ſubſiſt between theſe two facts, it is fit to mention here ſome of the rea- ſons, which may be offered in ſupport of it. St. Matthew informs us, that “Jeſus took Pe- “ter, James, and John his brother, and brought “ them up into an high mountain apart, and was “transfigured before them: and his face did ſhine “ as the ſun, and his raiment was white as the “light. And, behold, there appeared unto them “Moſes and Elias talking with him.” It is add- ed below, “A bright cloud overſhadowed them; “ and behold a voice out of the cloud, which “ ſaid, This is my beloved Son.” St. Mark’s account contains no material diffe- rence; that given to us by St. Luke, in ſome re- - ſpects, Reſurrection of the Body. - 439 ſpects, is more full and particular. We learn from him, that Moſes and Elias ſtood, 29&res à 9%, and that Peter, and they that were with him, “ ſaw his glory,” sióby Tºy AOEAN airs, namely, of Chriſt: and from the glorious colours in which the Son of God was exhibited in this great viſion, it might be, with the moſt emphatical propriety, denominated by St. Luke, “his glory,” h AOEA aúrg. And by equivalent terms, one of the Diſ- ciples, who was preſent in the mount, refers to it, where he ſays, ſpeaking plurally of himſelf, #Torral yeyń9éyrs; tº fixeiv3 METAAEIOTHTOS : and, as he proceeds, he adopts the very expreſſion uſed by St. Luke : X&Cºy yºp, he adds, ſpeaking of Chriſt, wagº. Oeg IIarºs TIMHN ×2 AOEAN, poſs sysX3 signs wºró Tolórðs (To ims psyaxo~ger&s 93%. From theſe forms of expreſſion, in which a word, conveying a particular deſcription, ſo forci- bly recurs, it ſeems not unlikely that the words of St. Paul, cºuc, tº AOEHS ºrg, carry in them an elevated ſenſe, to which the common con- ſtruction, his glorious body, is inadequate, even if the ſtrong and remarkable antitheſis, before not- ed, between Tazewºrea; hºw and 9%as wºrs, al- though containing no particular reference, did not of itſelf demand a more diſtinct notice. But, that the verſion of the paſſage ought faithfully to preſerve this reference, will perhaps be concluded more ſtrongly, from the reaſons which further appear in ſupport of the relation, F f 4 aſſerted 440 A Diſcourſe on the aſſerted to ſubſiſt between the two miracles in queſtion. It ſeems probable, that Chriſt did not clearly reveal his reſurreótion to the Diſciples till after the viſion. St. Mark repreſents the Apoſtles, when their Maſter mentioned his reſurre&tion, as “queſtioning one with another what the riſ- “ing from the dead ſhould mean.” But when the transfiguration had taken place, Chriſt pro- ceeded to give public aſſurance not only of his death, but alſo of his reſurreótion from the dead: and St. Matthew and St. Mark, almoſt immedi- ately after their deſcription of the ſcene in the mount, expreſsly inform us, that he began to preach his riſing from the dead. When our Lord, before the transfiguration, had caſually hinted that he ſhould “be killed,” and that he ſhould “be raiſed again;” “Be it far “ from thee, Lord,” ſaid St. Peter; perhaps imagining, that to ſuffer and to die were circum- ſtances degrading to his Maſter. But the viſion in the mount, to which he was, very ſoon after, admitted, gave him the fulleſt demonſtration, how the ſuffering of Chriſt ſhould be made com- patible with his dignity. On the mount he had the opportunity of hearing Moſes and Elias, ſpeaking “ of his deceaſe,” tºy #2%y airg, at the mention of which he had taken offence; and alſo of ſeeing his Maſter clothed with that glory, which, in his erroneous idea, would be deſtroyed by Reſurreółion of the Body. 44 i by his ſuffering. Thus, according to this inter- pretation, the two points, on which our Lord had diſcourſed, that Chriſt ſhould be “killed,” and be “raiſed again,” were at once fully re- vealed to this “offended Diſciple,” the former by the converſation of the two perſons, “who ap- “ peared in glory” with him ; the latter, by the Body of glory, which “he ſaw” then impreſſed upon the perſon of Chriſt. Theſe few circumſtances plead, perhaps ſtrong- ly, in favour of a connection between this viſion and the reſurrection. But this imagined con- neétion ſeems very much ſupported by the ex- preſs injunction of our Lord; “Tell the viſion to “no man, until the Son of Man be riſen again “ from the dead.” This reſtrićtion is repeated by St. Mark; and St. Luke obſerves, that “they kept it cloſe, and “ told no man, in thoſe days, any of thoſe things, “which they had ſeen.” The ſilence, which they were directed to obſerve “in thoſe days,” expired at a time, when it became improper not to declare openly “what things they had ſeen.” For it ſeems that the prohibition to relate them, “ until the Son of Man” were “ riſen from the “dead,” carried in it ſomething very like a com- mand to reveal them, when he ſhould be riſen : and why an account of the transfiguration would come with more propriety after than before the reſurreótion, is difficult to ſay, unleſs to tell the viſion before the reſurreótion were to make it precede 442 A Diſcourſe on the precede that fact, with which it was connected, and to which perhaps it was deſigned to apply. Theſe reaſons, ſtrengthened, as they may perhaps appear, by what will follow, lead me to imagine that to explain the reſurrečtion by the transfigu- ration, will be to refer that viſion to one of the purpoſes for which it was intended. But it is time to point out ſome conſequences of that application, which has.been thus defend- ed. We will ſuppoſe, then, that point admitted, with which this diſcourſe began, “the reſurrec- “tion of our Lord :” let the conſequence of it, “our own reſurrection,” be taken as granted alſo ; then immediately follows the very impor- tant queſtion, “How are the dead raiſed up, and “with what body do they come?” That they are raiſed at all, the ancient Sadducees denied : but by modern objećtors another courſe has been taken. The reſurre&tion of the body has been admitted, but made to ſuit a philoſophical maxim, that the ſame man may ſubſiſt, without the reunion of the ſame body to the ſame ſoul. The firſt obječtion, that there is no reſurreótion at all, may be left without notice, there being little probability that it will be admitted by many, or, at leaſt, openly avowed. But the laſt objećtion is pointed with much ſubtlety, and muſt be obviated before the remarks to be of. fered on the ſcene in the mount can have any weight. It cannot be denied, that the human body dies, and Reſurre&ion of the Body. 4:43 and that it ſees corruption; and, if there be a re- ſurrečtion of the dead, that it cannot conſiſt in any thing, but the reſcue of that human body from corruption. To fancy, with ſome, the re- ſurre&tion of an alien unburied body, would be to admit an abſurdity, ſuch as muſt be implied in a contradićtion of terms. The credibility of the reſurreótion muſt therefore not be admitted imperfectly, without an inſult to common rea- ſon. It is either abſolutely falſe, or poſitively true in the utmoſt latitude : either God will not interpoſe at all to work this miracle, or, that ſame mouldering ſubſtance, “ faſt bound” by death in the grave, ſhall “hear his voice and “ come forth.” A reſurrection of this ſort, and with ſuch cir- cumſtances as theſe, is referred to by the pro- phets in their uſual exalted language: “Your heart “ſhall rejoice, and your bones ſhall flouriſh like an “ herb,” ſaith Iſaiah, “ and the hand of the Lord “ſhall be known towards his ſervants.” Ezekiel ſpeaks more plainly—that in the Spirit of the Lord he ſaw “a valley full of bones, and there “ was a noiſe, and, behold, a ſhaking, and the “bones came together, bone to his bone, the “ſinews and the fleſh came upon them, and the “ ſkin covered them above, and their breath “ came into them, and they lived, and ſtood “upon their feet.” The reſurrection of the body, and of the ſame body, ſeem then to be ideas, that do not admit of a poſſible ſeparation. Büt 444 A Diſcourſe on the But this difficulty will hamper ſome philoſo- phical principles, of which many have been ſcru- pulouſly tenacious. Attempts have therefore been made, either to remove or cut through it. If it be indeed true, as ſome inſinuate, that the conſciouſneſs of the ſoul, which inhabits the body, is a ſufficient conſtituent of ſameneſs, then, even upon this venturous principle, a reſurrec- tion cannot be made out, unleſs the ſoul itſelf be mortal, which few will be hardy enough to af- firm. They who take ſuch conſciouſneſs as proof of identity might, it ſhould ſeem, not un- ſucceſsfully repair to the illuſtrious heathen of Samos for better information ; even his error would, ſo far, inſtruct them. He would tell them, that although his ſoul had retained her conſciouſneſs, under three ſucceſſive bodies, yet that he felt and nominally diſtinguiſhed himſelf, as a different perſon under them all. Identity of man can never be preſerved, unleſs by retaining that union of matter and ſpirit, of body and ſoul, which always enter into the compoſition of human nature. And until we learn how to ſeparate ſubſtances without break- ing their union, we ſhall be obliged, if we admit a reſurreótion at all, to expect the reunion of that compound ſubſiſtence which muſt form the identity of man. But here an objection ſtands in the way, which by ſome has been ſtrongly enforced. The changeful and corruptible body of man, when by Reſurrection of the Body. 445 by death ſubječted to the loweſt ſtate of corrup- tion, paſſes rapidly into numberleſs, and perhaps ſtill more periſhable, atoms, till they, having been continually hurried through various ſtages of conſiſtence, are at length confounded in an abyſs of matter, or totally evaporated. But to ſuch obječtors the voice of reaſon will cry, ſi- lence and ſhame !—Who dares affirm, that God will not, or, if he will, that he cannot, exert as much power in reſtoring, as he doth daily ſhew in preſerving, the identity of man 2 For it ought not to be forgotten, that, in a tranſitory and periſhable being, ſuch as is that of man, “never,” as holy Writ emphatically deſcribes him, “con- “tinuing in one ſtay,” his identity can in no wiſe be made out upon philoſophical, that is, upon abſolute and perfect principles. And yet, the common ſenſe of mankind offers no objec- tion to the identity of man, while he lives, and holds out in his own perſon a ſtriking confuta- tion of that idea, upon which ſome have ven- tured to define it. An humble mind might ac- quieſce in a negative notion of identity, becauſe, as it ſeems, in a fading ſtate, and in reſpect of a frail being, who “ dies daily,” none of a poſitive kind can be formed. Quod non eſt aliud, eſt ădem, may very poſſibly be a ſafe maxim, and ſuch as will condućt an enquirer into the nature of the reſurreótion, as far as human underſtand- ing can penetrate. All theſe obſervations, and many more to the like 446 A Diſcourſe on the like purpoſe, will be ſtrongly confirmed, if that application of St. Paul's words, of which it remains to ſpeak more particularly, be well founded. - The text ſets forth, that in conſequence of that power, which ſhall transfigure, wercºmpart- arei, the body of our humiliation, a likeneſs to Chriſt's body of glory ſhall be induced, and made to ſuperſede our former faſhion, ºftwari tº rºwd- tos ºuſy. We ſeem obliged to infer from theſe words, that Chriſt's body of glory is the arche- type, to which our raiſed, and, therefore tranſ- figured body ſhall be conformed. But if, as the Scripture every where teaches, our bodies ſhall again live, only in conſequence of the mira- cle, that Chriſt's body was previouſly raiſed, it will with reaſon be expected, that the raiſed body of man ſhould, as before obſerved, be the likeneſs of the raiſed body of Chriſt. Was there- fore, it will now be aſked, the raiſed body of Chriſt the body of his glory # This queſtion is in this place ſo very important, that it demands a direct anſwer. The body, which our Lord car- ried back into life, was that, which he had borne about before his death, and was the ſame in which he had been transfigured—it was indeed his body, but naked, and ſtript of glory. For the fact of his identity was ſo very material, that it alone required abſolute demonſtration ; and no- thing could fully aſcertain it, but the moſt palpa- ble aſſurance. It was therefore neceſſary that -- Chriſt Reſurre&ion of the Body. 447 Chriſt ſhould plainly ſhew himſelf in ſubſtance, nature, and faſhion, the ſame individual, which the ſenſes of men had always repreſented him. For this cauſe his wounds were made to remain on his body. For this cauſe he ſhewed himſelf ſubject to his former infirmities, as ſtill material and paſſible. He thankfully received from the hands of his Diſciples “a piece of a broiled fiſh “ and an honey-comb, and did eat before them.” What could be the conſequence of ſuch exhibi- tions of himſelf, but the certainty that the Lord was riſen indeed 2 But when he thus manifeſted himſelf, for the purpoſe of convincing the Apo- ſtles that he was riſen, what marks or impreſ- ſions of glory were then diſtinguiſhable on his perſon Having carried to the grave rôwo puz- zov, did he then, when raiſed, appear to have brought back gºwo, aveupatizáy When Mary ſaw him in the garden, there was nothing about his appearance, that did not juſtify her in ſuppoſing him to be the gardener; ſhe knew him, as it ſeems, by his . voice. The two Diſciples in the road ſaw nothing in his perſon, but what would very well ſuit the character of a ſtranger at Jeruſalem. They would aſſuredly have known him, if their eyes had not been holden. Indeed, it was impoſſible for the keeneſt ſenſes to diſcover a difference, between what Chriſt then was, and what he had been ; and therefore the end of his continuance upon earth, 4.48 A Diſcourſe on the earth, after his reſurreótion, was fully anſwered ; inconteſtable evidence was thus given, that his body was delivered from the bonds of death. But this body of Chriſt was only ſo far glorious, as the triumph over death had made it, but it was not his body of glory referred to in the text. St. Matthew informs us, that the eleven Diſci- ples, probably upon the meſſage delivered by the women, who were returned from the ſepul- chre, went up into a mountain of Galilee, “where “Jeſus had appointed them.”—it may be to the very ſcene where he had been transfigured— and “ there they ſaw and worſhipped him.” There were three of the number, who, if the body of Chriſt, then exhibited to their ſenſes, was not the ſame, which had been clothed with glory in the mount, muſt be ſuppoſed capable of detecting the difference. But there was indeed no difference—it is certain that Chriſt did retain the ſame body, although unadorned with that faſhion of glory, with which they had ſeen it ar- rayed. The Diſciples, who had been favoured with a ſight of his former appearance in glory, being at length aſſured of his reſurrection from the dead, were bound to “tell the viſion” to their brethren, who were now alſo become ca- pable of underſtanding, and applying it properly. And from that application a ſyſtem of evidence would ariſe, too ſtrong and deciſive to be reſiſted, and Reſurrection of the Body. 440 and little doubt would remain, either that the dead are raiſed up, or with what body they do COIſle. When Chriſt led up the three Diſciples into the mount, a perfect knowledge of his perſon and faſhion was, no doubt, impreſſed on their ſenſes: the ſame knowledge of him ſubſiſted, during the continuance of the viſion, and after it. It is evident, that they diſtinguiſhed their Maſter from the two who appeared in the mount with him : it may be alſo not unfairly preſumed, that they diſtinguiſhed the two prophets from each other. If this ſuppoſition be true, we ſeem obliged to confeſs, that in the perſons of them all there remained that portion of abſolute identity, which was neceſſary to convince the Diſciples, even although their eyes, overpowered by this heavenly viſion, were “heavy with ſleep,” that the three great perſons whom they ſaw were the ſame, to whom the titles of Jeſus, Moſes, and Elias, had been always ſeverally aſſigned. Again : we read that the faſhion of Chriſt's countenance was changed, “ and that his rai- “ ment became white as ſnow.” Not only his raiment, but alſo his features and perſon, paſſed under an extraordinary change. This change, to the ſenſes of the beholders, was attended with ſuch ſplendid marks of glory, that it wrought on them the moſt awful impreſſions, “for they were fore afraid.” Theſe ſtrange ſen- ſations had not affected them before the com- G g Innen Cement 450 A Diſcourſe on the mencement of the viſion; and when the glorious appearance ceaſed, the effects, which it had wrought on them, expired too : “they looked “round, and ſaw Jeſus ſtanding alone with “ themſelves.” Their ſenſes, from the time of aſcending into the mount, to the inſtant of de- ſcending from it, had obſerved enough of their Maſter, to diſtinguiſh accurately the two ſeveral changes made in him, when he put on glory, and when he laid that glory down ; and, even when Chriſt was clothed with his body of glory, they hailed him, Lord and Maſter, as knowing him to be the ſame perſon, whom they had always honoured with thoſe titles.—The concluſion in this reſpect ſeems obvious, that Chriſt's form of glory was aſſumed, and continued on his perſon, without deſtroying his identity: or, in other words, that even undera change from bodily humi- liation, to bodily glory, he appeared ſubſtantially the ſame. And we ought to conclude in like manner of the perſons of Moſes and Elias. Further: it is poſſible, that the difference of that glory, which was ſtamped upon the pro- phets who ſtood with Chriſt in the mount, might be ſufficiently ſtriking to diſtinguiſh theſe two merely human perſons from the great One. But it does not appear that this difference was ſo ſignal, as to affect, in any forcible and lively manner, the ſenſes of the Diſciples. On the contrary, the likeneſs between the three appear- ances of glory induced St. Peter to form ſimilar. not1OnS Reſurrection of the Body. 451 notions of them all: “Let us build here three “ tabernacles, one for Thee, and one for Moſes, “ and one for Elias;” intending, as it ſeems, to pay them all an equal honour.—Here then, on this holy mount, were exhibited to the eyes of the Apoſtles, mere men, like themſelves, wearing a glorified form, like to that faſhion of glory, in which their Lord then appeared: they ſaw a ſºuz, Tng Tazewºreog huôy, ſo gloriouſly modified and transfigured, percºnwalićuevoy, six to Yevé&al avºwog- (poy tº a war. ris AOEHS ºrg. Once more : it ſhould be remembered, that one of the two prophets, who appeared in glory on the mount, “ had never ſeen death"—and as, in the perſon of Moſes, the buried part of man- kind are repreſented under an aſſumed body of glory, ſo alſo, in the perſon of Elias, the like re- preſentation was made of thoſe, who ſhould “ be . “found alive, and remain unto Chriſt's coming.” In one word ; a change from humiliation to glory ſubſiſted in this viſion, without deſtroying the perſonal identity of any, who ſubmitted to it : and this change was the copy of that faſhion, which was ſeen in the body of Chriſt's glory; and it was exhibited in perſons, who could ſeverally ſtand as the proper repreſenta- tives of men, quick and dead. And, therefore, thus is the reſurrection of the dead—our body “is ſown a natural body, it is “ raiſed a ſpiritual body—it is ſown in diſhonour, “it is raiſed in glory"—and, “as we have borne,” G g 2 in 452 A Diſcourſe on the in “our body of humiliation,” the “image of the “earthy,” we ſhall alſo bear, in “the body of our “glory,” the “image of the heavenly,” tº regavia, of Him that is in heaven, for “fleſh and blood “cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven.” And now all fair objections to the credibility of the reſurreótion ſeem to loſe much of their weight. This great viſion will inform men, that it is very poſſible to the hand of Omnipotence ſo to modify matter, as to induce change, without deſtroying identity, and to preſerve the ſameneſs of a body of humiliation, even when it is transfi- gured to a body of glory. It is aſſerted by thoſe, who maintain the ſcriptural idea of reſurrection, that God has promiſed to repeat this miracle: and if it be true that God has made promiſe of it, not to reſt ſatisfied in the expectation that it ſhall again happen muſt be the conſequence of more impiety than weakneſs. z From what has been ſaid there ſeems reaſon to believe, that the article of the Chriſtian Church, aſſerting the reſurrection of the body, that is, as it claims to be underſtood, of the ſame body, is ſcriptural, and therefore true. It ſeems moreover to reſult from the compariſon now made between theſe two important facts, that it was one great end of the transfiguration of Chriſt to give ample information in reſpect of the reſurrection, and to prevent miſtakes which might be, and partly have been, made in that point of doćtrine, by arguments drawn from that body Reſurrečtion of the Body. 453 body of Chriſt in which he appeared after his reſurrection, which was not, truly and poſitively, his body of glory. And now, with what pity will the Chriſtian philoſopher look back upon the ſages of the heathen world, hurried from one wild and fan- taſtic opinion to another, without finding any point, on which even their own minds could fix with ſatisfaction ? He will caſt a ſorrowful re- troſpect to thoſe ages of error, when the exiſt- ence of God was doubted or denied, and chance was ſet up in his place, as a being competent to ſupport the world, perhaps even to eternity. He will not wonder, that even the nature of man ſhould, in thoſe days, be utterly unknown. But while he pities, he will, at the ſame time, venerate thoſe good men, who attempted, in that age of ignorance, to correct and reform the opinions of mankind. They combated, he will obſerve, many popular errors, and, by diſperſing their own improved ſyſtems, endeavoured to lead the minds of men to a better conception of mo- ral and phyſical truth. But, in regard to moral truth, the foundation, upon which they were obliged to build, was neceſſarily weak and inſe- cure. Inſtead of certainty and convićtion, which alone carry any deciſive influence, they could ſubſtitute only probability and conjecture. After the moſt extenſive and induſtrious enquiry; after having conſulted the prieſts of Egypt and other countries, even the Samian ſage returned ſtill G g 3 unable 454 A Diſcourſe on the unable to comprehend the nature of man. In his notions of the ſoul, he was ſtrangely viſion- ary; in reſpect of the body, he was utterly unin- formed. The body, it was certainly known, muſt die: men lived, according to the philoſophical lan- guage of the times, @9 agro, xexrnwávo aºua. It was then a very obvious idea, that, after death, the body would be loſt for ever in the maſs of that corruptible matter, which originally com- poſed it. Accordingly, as it appears, the Sa- mian philoſopher proceeded upon this notion, and, after the ſeparation of the ſoul from it, left the body unregarded. He aſſigned the ſame ſoul ſucceſſively to different bodies by his fanci- ful theory of tranſmigration, which was adopted by many of his followers, and admitted, in part, by the Phariſees in the time of our Lord. In- deed a total diſregard to the body ſeems to be the principle upon which this doćtrine was founded. And, if the body, as he probably thought, had no better concern in the compoſi- tion of human nature, than to lend a vehicle to the ſoul in her temporal ſtate, it was not indeed of any conſequence, how many ſucceſſive bodies the ſoul ſhould, upon any hypotheſis, be fancied to inhabit. It is true, that this philoſopher held indeed the doćtrine of a future life; and this ſame idea was defended by none of his followers more warmly, than it was by him whom the oracle pronounced wiſeſt of men. The moſt s' lofty Reſurrečtion of the Body. 45.5 lofty effuſions of his great ſcholar are neverthe- leſs only ſpeculations on the immortality of the ſoul. The meditations upon death, which ſome an- cient ſages have left behind them, breathe indeed a ſpirit and energy, that may ſeem extraordinary for the feelings of heathens: but they appear to turn upon a very defective principle. That death will deliver man from human evil is indeed no more than a negative benefit; and that it will reſcue a free and heavenly ſoul from the groſs ſervitude, to which it is ſubjected by the body, is indeed the truth, although not the whole truth. But their footing muſt have been unſure, if they had ventured further. They were not authorized to contemplate death as carrying the ſoul to a better ſtate of being, when it might happily ſubſiſt in union with the body, purified from thoſe carnal tendencies, which had hitherto made it the enemy of the ſoul. This was a ſcene diſcoverable only by the enlightened eye of faith, and, of courſe, far above out of the fight of hea- then moraliſts. - We are certain that the reſurreótion of Chriſt has cleared up all human doubts, by making the two diſtant periods, now and hereafter, to paſs under our view ; and by exhibiting to man as clear a proſpect of his faſhion and form under the latter of theſe periods, as human ſenſes enjoy under the former. The Chriſtian ſage may then take his ſtand as G g 4 upon 456 A Diſcourſe on the Reſurreółion &c. upon a rock, and contemplate the preſent and . future ſcene of things with calmneſs and ſecu- rity. He has learned to look upon death as friendly to man; the end, but not the misfortune, of human nature. He will be vigilant in pre- ſerving that intereſt, which is given him in a better world : he will labour to maintain the purity of his ſoul, that it may be more highly prepared to reliſh the ſweet of heavenly hap- pineſs, and he will worſhip the Lord with an unpolluted body, that it may hereafter, with ſlighteſt alteration, admit a glorified form. A DISCOURSE ON H U M I L IT Y. DISCOURSE H U M I L IT Y. GALATIANS v. 26. Let us not be deſirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another. IT has been obſerved, that human life is a ſtate of ſuffering; and, in a certain degree, ſuch a re- preſentation of it has a foundation in truth. The remark may be traced up to the earlieſt ages, and the moraliſts of antiquity were ſo ſtrongly con- vinced of its truth, that, in their endeavours to elevate or defend the human mind, they have directed their principles, not only againſt the in- fluence of the evil, but alſo of the good that might occur in human life. Some among them have attempted to prevent the dangerous enchantment of proſperity, by re- commending, 460 A Diſcourſe on Humility. commending, in an exalted ſtrain, the contempt of worldly good. But this principle undeſervedly depreciates the good things of life; for as they have been given to man by the beneficent Author of his being, they cannot fairly be repreſented as neceſſary cauſes of human miſery. It has been ſaid, that nothing is great, of which the contempt is great; and it appears not leſs true, that nothing deſerves the title of good, which it is good to deſpiſe. If, then, a chance remains, that the things of life may be made inſtruments of good, we may, poſ- ſibly, by deſpiſing them, ſhew more raſhneſs than wiſdom, and incur the double misfortune of doing injuſtice to them and to ourſelves. Hardineſs, or apathy of mind, has alſo been recommended as an effectual defence againſt evil. But it cannot be ſaid, that defence is made, when the ſtruggle is declined. Inſtead of en- couraging the powers of the ſoul, and giving it new force to meet and ſuſtain the hoſtile aſſault, this principle deprives it even of the paſſive power of reſignation. When it is not permitted to feel any longer, then of neceſſity it ceaſes to endure; and it is deprived of all chance of vićtory, by being thus obliged to ſhrink from the combat. The truth is, that the patrons of both theſe principles have paſſed the boundaries of right reaſon, and proceeded to extravagance. Within theſe two extremes lies that ſound principle, which will aſſuredly defend the ſoul under the €Il- A Diſcourſe on Humility. 461 enchantment of good and the preſſure of evil, without excluding it either from the honourable character of moderation under the one, or of for- titude under the other. It is equally remote from the hardy ſcorn and the mean love of good, and from impatience and inſenſibility un- der evil. There appears a negative repreſentation of this principle in the admonition, “Let us not be de- “ſirous of vain glory, provoking one another, “envying one another.” The Apoſtle ſeems to refer to the two diſtinctions of ſuperior and infe- rior ſtation; on the one part, he diſſuades a ſpirit of inſult and provocation, which men ſometimes exhauſt on thoſe beneath them ; and, on the other part, he diſcourages a ſpirit of envy, with which inferiors frequently look up to thoſe above them. Both theſe are founded in that ſort of ſelf-love, which is either jealous and rigorouſly tenacious of its own over-rated greatneſs, or grudges any advantages to another, preſuming a title of its own to them to be far ſuperior to that of the real poſſeſſor. The reverſe of this principle will reach both theſe conditions of human life, and will ačt be- neficially upon each of them, by reſtraining in ſuperiors a diſpoſition to provoke, and in inferiors a propenſity to envy. To the former it will pre- ſerve all the advantages and prevent the dangers of their proſperous condition; and in behalf of the 462 A Diſcourſe on Humility. the latter it will alleviate the real and take away the imagined evils of their adverſity. It is obvious, from this ſhort character, that humility is the valuable principle in view ; in recommendation of which, if obvious and plain obſervations are here recalled to mind, it can only be done with ſome hope of increaſing their influence by means of that recollection. Yet even this taſk is not without difficulty. Such is the extent of humility, that it compriſes in itſelf moſt of thoſe graces, which are either of uſe or ornament to our nature; and indeed to many among them it gives their very exiſtence. Ac- cordingly, it is not eaſy to diſtinguiſh the effects of humility from the effects of qualities which ſpring from it; and to eſtimate the value of it ſingly and entirely detached from caſes, which ought perhaps in ſtrićtneſs to be referred to moderation, benevolence, candour, and ſimilar graces, of which humility is the reputed parent. For this, however, it may be urged, by way of excuſe, that humility, as well as wiſdom, is juſti- fied in all her children. .* Theſe few things being premiſed, let us apply humility to proſperity, and then to adverſity, as a convenient quality and a religious principle. To begin with the firſt application. Proſperity has this peculiar diſadvantage, that it cannot but ſuffer by a reverſe of fortune. For this plain reaſon it has much leſs conneétion - with A Diſcourſe on Humility. 403 with hope than adverſity. But ſince a proſperous condition leaves little to hope, it muſt propor- tionably leave ſo much the more to fear. Where the reaſon to fear is greateſt, ſecurity is moſt likely to ruin ; and if the path is ſlippery, there can be nothing ſo certain to ſupplant as confi- dence. In truth, we cannot be ſafe, when we have forgotten our wants ; and whatever may be the dangers which threaten us from other quarters, it is highly probable, that the moſt ſud- den and moſt grievous ariſe from inattention to the defects of our nature. When the human faculties are exerted to accompliſh the purpoſes of ambition, or to gratify the love of wealth or of fame, the mind, in a great meaſure ſtrained by this exerciſe, may continue cautious and wake- ful in all its powers. But the greateſt danger begins, when the ſtruggle is at an end. When deſire has met with gratification, the mind is often Iulled into an indolent ſecurity. The few ſtays of virtue, if any remained, are gradually drawn away; ſocial and benevolent feelings languiſh or expire, and leave a void in the heart. Self-love uſurps that vacant place; and as this principle can make no compariſon that is not to the diſ- advantage of others, it arrogates, as due only to ſelf, the tribute of general admiration and ho- mage. But men will commonly refuſe reſpect, when it is ſought only as a ſacrifice to pride, and expected without deſerving it. Accordingly ſelf- love is generally diſappointed. Upon this, the mind 464 A Diſcourſe on Humility. mind is rouſed into a new kind of action. The paſſions grow inflamed, and break out into re- ſentment, and thus what is at firſt only the im- patience of diſappointed pride riſes at length to the violence of inſult. The evil commences in a ſmall and ſtealing ſtream, but ends in a wild and ſweeping torrent. As the words of St. Paul, “provoking one “ another,” are confined to that particular abuſe of proſperity whereby it is rendered inſupporta- ble to others, they ſuggeſt no immediate notice of thoſe evils, which the unreſtrained indul- gences of ſenſual affection may have been in the mean while accumulating, till they have left the individual himſelf ſcarcely ſo much of happineſs as may conſiſt merely in the abſence of pain, even till the health of body and mind has been ſacri- ficed to the licentiouſneſs of nature. Such ſeem the ſteps by which men too often degenerate, and pervert proſperity, from being the means of general good, to an inſtrument of general offence. But there is danger not only in the abuſe of ſuperior fortune, but alſo in the abuſe of ſuperior knowledge. For mankind in general are alike moved with a deſire of knowledge, and with a fondneſs of acceding to illuſtrious examples. Hence ſuperiority in knowledge becomes an im- portant depoſit, in which all have an intereſt, who are placed within the circle of its influence. The evils induced by the perverſion of it are perhaps A Diſcourſe on Humility. 465 perhaps more than proportionable to the advan- tages, that may enſue from its proper applica- tion: for the abuſe of the beſt things tends ſooneſt to conſequences the moſt pernicious. Deſire of knowledge, when ill directed, as it introduced the firſt misfortune of man, ſo it con- tinues occaſionally to throw a ſnare in his way. Indeed, if the intereſt of virtue and human hap- pineſs were always as dear as the fame of literary preeminence, the poſſeſſion of knowledge would be in every hand a valuable good. But the re- verſe of this is too often ſeen. The powers of many well-informed minds are exerted upon fri- volous and ſometimes upon pernicious enquiries, when ſelf-love is the great ſpring that puts them in motion. Real truth is often defaced by the ſubtlety of refinement, or boldly ſacrificed in the wantonneſs of new diſcovery. There is a fan- cied greatneſs of ſoul in forſaking the beaten road; and ſo the way be unexplored, it is not heeded that the footing is unſure. Under ſuch a direction, the mind diſclaims advantages which may be drawn from the experience of others; and, in the zeal to eſcape ſuppoſed error and pre- judice on one ſide, becomes imperceptibly as miſtaken, and more enſlaved, on the other. The luſt of innovation gathers ſtrength from the ap- plauſe of many, who regard plain and accuſ- tomed truth, as ſuch, with indifference or aver- ſion. Thus a mind of this caſt advances alone, having, like the fooliſh woman, forſaken the H h guide 466 A Diſcourſe on Humility. guide of her youth, and proceeds on, ſtep by ſtep, unſettling its principles of a learned or a moral kind, till the enquiries, which it has ſo ar- dently indulged, end farther from wiſdom, far- ther from virtue, than they began. The certain and effectual antidote to this ab- uſe of ſuperior fortune, and to this perverſion of ſuperior knowledge, lies in the ſaving diſcipline of humility. Among all the chances of human things, and all the uncertainties of human wif- dom, this principle only can give ſteadineſs to the mind, and balance it againſt every weight, and every wind of doćtrine, that would other- wiſe unſettle and diſcompoſe it. Nor is there in its nature any thing that is ſervile or ignoble. It bears an honourable and independent charaćter, and, as it poſſeſſes all the advantages that pride aims at, and eſcapes all the evils it incurs, it is perfectly compatible with the higheſt proſperity of fortune, and the greateſt accompliſhments of mind. If the end of pride is manifeſtly the ag- grandizement of ſelf, even to this end humility would go by the ſhorter way. We are taught by a great authority, “that honour ſhall uphold “ the humble in ſpirit;” and to the truth of the remark pride itſelf is compelled to bear teſtimo- ny, by appearing in diſguiſe, and frequently ac- compliſhing its purpoſes by the aid of counter- feited humility. If the influence of humility upon the life and manners of a man, acting under a ſcene of pro- . ſperity, A Diſcourſe on Humility. 467 ſperity, were to be delineated with any tolerable degree of juſtice and accuracy, the view would preſent impreſſions of the moſt exalted and en- dearing caſt. Some of them may faintly appear in the abſtract which follows. A profuſion of good things, which ſeem more eaſy to be loſt than enjoyed wiſely, is much too great for men without their proportionate en- deavours to deſerve them. And even if the en- deavour to deſerve them is proportionate, ſtill they are indeed given, but not earned. The good which men receive ſtands only in the nature of a depoſit, which may ſoon be called out of their hands. It muſt not then be conſidered as their own; but on what conditions, for what purpoſes, and for what time, they hold it, the abſolute and undoubted owner muſt preſcribe. Allgood things, then, may change their poſſeſſors; from prepara- tion made for that viciſſitude will flow much of the conſolation to be wiſhed for under the loſs of them. It is then a prudential concern to con- dućt the uſe of them with moderation, and not to ſuffer habits of indulgence or of pride to grow up, and fix deſires upon the mind, which will become outrageous, if a change ſhould enſue, and debar them from their wonted gratification. It is wiſdom to uſe them as means of conciliating the favour of others, and making friends to pity and help upon any diſaſtrous turn. To uſe them as inſtruments of provoking others is as unſafe, H h 2 31S 468 A Diſcourſe on Humility. as it ought to be grating. To all may be given. a ſpeedy opportunity of repaying double for ſcorn and inſult. If the fall enſues, let them be friends and not focs that muſt look on. This is a ſhort view of the effects of humility as a principle of convenience ; but as a principle of religion, how forcibly will it influence the Chriſtian Him it will inſtruct that the endea- vour to deſerve the good things of life implies ſuch an application of them, as agrees with the deſign of the giver as the rule. He pretends to no intereſt in them, that is not ſubſervient to the intention of him from whom he received them. He obediently uſes them in carrying on the pur- poſes of heaven, and labours together with God, by fulfilling the duty of man. He perceives that God hath given him by theſe depoſits the power of furthering the intereſts of divine love; and, as the love of God is no contracted principle, he will not ſet up himſelf, as independent of the children of virtue, the truly beloved of God. As they are objećts dear to God, they will be alſo dear to him ; he will ſeek them with ſolici- tude, and befriend them with cheerfulneſs, but without oftentation; the applauſe of his own heart affects him but ſlightly, and he declines. with more indifference the applauſe of the world. Virtuous men will find ſomething ſo gentle and mild in his manners, ſo attentive and affectionate in his concern for them, that they will endure his A Diſcourſe on Humility. 460 his ſuperiority without one envious murmur, and look up to his proſperity with a cordial bleſſing. In ſtations of authority and power, he will be much leſs pleaſed with his poſſeſſion of emi- nence, than with the means he has of benefi- cence. He will watch with ſuſpicious precau- tion, that power in his hands may not corrupt himſelf, nor bind any heavy burdens upon others. In him no intruding ſelf-affection will be per- mitted to weaken the ſenſe of duty and reſpon- ſibility to God and mankind. If he cultivates knowledge with ſucceſs, he will apply it without preſumption. The firſt thing he will diſcover, and the laſt he will forget, is the weakneſs of that knowledge. He will therefore read the book of nature with caution and diffidence, and the book of God with re- verence and fear. Of God he will think as Re- velation deſcribes him, and neither ſpeculate without it, nor oppoſe to it any privileged ideas or attachments of his own. He will labour ra- ther to enforce the duty, than to explain the nature, of man; nor will any way weaken the hopes, or the fears, or moral ſanctions, which the word of God puts before him as incentives to virtue. And if his mind ſhould unwarily riſe to the contemplation of things, which lie above the reach of human faculties, and want adequate terms of deſcription in human language, he will pauſe in fear of miſtaking the ſhew for the reality 470 A Diſcourſe on Humility. reality of evidence, and where enquiry has not the means of being free, he will not permit it to be licentious. The application of humility to adverſity was the ſecond thing propoſed; and in the way to that application we may obſerve what a pićture humility will draw of adverſity itſelf. It has been obſerved already, that human life is a ſtate of ſuffering, and in the language of the New Teſtament it is called a warfare, a fight, and referred to by many otheragoniſtical alluſions. In the verſes immediately preceding the text the Apoſtle obſerves, “They that are Chriſt's have “ crucified the fleſh with the affections and luſts.” And indeed the ſacred writers frequently enforce their principles of ſelf-denial by inferences from the doćtrine of the Croſs. When we recollect. how far the fall of man, with the dreadful conſe- quences of it, muſt be aſcribed to the influence of pride, it may appear very reaſonable that any diſpenſation, which provided a remedy for thoſe evils, ſhould be founded in humiliation and ſelf- denial. It ſeems that the Jews and judaizing reaſoners of old and modern times have conſi- dered neither the nature of the evils which Chriſ- tianity was intended to cure, nor the ſpirit of the remedy which it provided, when they took offence at what is called the ſcandal of the Croſs. “He that will come after me, let him deny “ himſelf and take up his croſs,” are the words of our Lord. If he ſubmitted to make a ſacri-, fice A Diſcourſe on Humility. 471 fice for us, there is alſo a certain ſenſe in which we are to make ſacrifices for his ſake. So that ſince, upon a general view, life appears a ſtage of ſuffering, on a Chriſtian view it appears morally ſo. And only pride and preſumption will com- plain, when that, which is the common lot of human nature, is converted by the parental ſpirit of Chriſtianity into an inſtrument of promoting the moſt valuable intereſts of man. Thus, under the picture that humility draws, adverſity loſes much of its terror, and appears more like an ima- ginary, than a real evil. t But the miſguided mind of man refuſes the counſel of humility, and reverſes this repreſenta- tion. The pride of human life, and an impa- tience of ſuffering, unite with an exorbitant long- ing for abſent good, in aggravating evil. Theſe diſpoſitions are ſtrengthened by indulgence, and, if not ſeaſonably reſtrained, grow violent, and at length bear down reaſon and reflection. One of them ends in moroſe diſcontent, the other in ha- bitual envy. On their invaſion of the heart, double is the evil that befalls it. Benumbed and deadened to the enjoyment of that good which is in poſſeſſion, it is left alive only to vexation on account of that which is not. It is not heed- ed that no condition in human life, however un- promiſing or abject, is totally deſtitute of good. The improvement of that latent good is not the way taken, though it would be the ſure one, to leſſen that evil, which may predominate. But the 472 A Diſcourſe on Humility. the mind grows reſtleſs in making compariſons, and in ſtating them always againſt its own caſe ; contrary to the common laws of comparing, it brings diffinilar things together; it ſets not evil againſt evil, but evil againſt good. From ſuch a compariſon men can only know how much leſs good they poſſeſs than others. If, on the contrary, they compared degrees of evil, they would often find how much leſs of evil is incident to their own condition, than that of their neighbour. In the midſt of ſuch a proceſs as this, if the principle of humility interpoſed its influence, the ſalutary effect of that interpoſition would be eaſi- ly diſcerned. Another train of ſentiments would immediately take poſſeſſion of the mind, and would incline it to proceed rather in a deſcend- ing ſcale, by comparing bad fortune with worſe, low rank with lower, and pain with heavier pain; and then a compariſon ſo conducted could have no unfavourable termination. Thus men might diſcover that they were ſubjećted to leſs evil than they fuſpected, and had received a greater proportion of good than they knew. When by this method they were habituated to look down rather than to look up, and to enquire how happy they comparatively were rather than how unfortunate, a check would be put to that admiration of abſent good, which created ſuch anxieties before; there would remain leſs tempta- tion to covet, and to envy. The private peace of men would not be diſturbed by fanciful deſire, anº A Diſcourſe on Humility. 473 and the offices of ſocial intercourſe would ceaſe to be interrupted by frowardneſs and ſpleen. Thus far humility would act as a principle of convenience; and it is no leſs eaſy to diſcern that it would act as a motive of duty, and main- tain a beneficial influence on the mind of a Chriſtian, as a religious principle. He knows that it was not the intent of his Maker to ex empt him from temptation or actual ſuffering; he therefore believes it his appointed duty to for- bear and endure. The temptations which at- tend every ſtation are, he imagines, always pro- portionate to the advantages of it: if he ſhould be lifted up higher, more talents will be then truſted to him, and his dangers will be increaſed with his duties. Feeling that he hardly poſſeſſes virtue enough to ſave him in his preſent condi- tion, he fears, if new obligations and new dangers come upon him, that he ſhall have much too little to ſecure him. If any diſcontent riſes in his heart, he will check it with the reflection, that he bears leſs evil, and enjoys more good, than he deſerves; and therefore has much more reaſon to bleſs the bounty, than to repine at the ſeverity of his Maker. And as it is more eaſy to follow than to lead, he apprehends it likely that the good example of others may be more beneficial than his own. He wiſhes alſo that errors in his con- dućt ſhould reach himſelf only, and never be in the way to caſt an unhappy influence on many. Thus his humility bears a moral tendency, and Ii inclines 474 A Diſcourſe on Humility. inclines him to prefer even the certainty of ſuf- fering in his own perſon, to the chance of be- coming the occaſion of offence and injury to others. He ſtrives therefore to reſt with calm- neſs in his appointed fortune, and to look even upon ſome calamities, as inſtances of God's mercy preventing greater evils, or as proofs of his own demerit, and therefore ſeaſonable re- bukes; and thus endeavours to make himſelf a gainer in either view. But humility riſes in the eſteem, and commands almoſt the veneration, of a Chriſtian, when he conſiders it as commanded by his God, and con- ſecrated by the example of his Saviour. Theſe are ſuch ſanctions, that, independently of all other motives, they would prevail with him, and determine him at all events to lowlineſs of heart. For if thoſe habits of mind, which God requires on our part, did not promote, perhaps even if they counteračted, human happineſs, he would nevertheleſs feel his obligation to obey the com- mand of his Maker. But God has not made vir- tue ſo difficult or unfriendly; he has joined hu- man duty with human intereſt. The Chriſtian cheriſhes that temper of mind for the ſake of God, which, conſidering the defects and inſtabi- lity of ſublunary things, would have been eligi- ble for his own. He ſees, and remembers as a rule to himſelf, that whoever hurries through the confuſions and the ſtruggles of life without the protection of humility, muſt encounter oppoſition at A Diſcourſe on Humility. 475 at every turn, and be met by the very ſlights and diſappointments he would ſhun ; muſt want every encouragement but that of vain hopes and vain-glory; that his manifold ſtruggles muſt be condućted with difficulty, and be terminated without honour; that he hath offered deſpite to the favour of men, and hath departed from the example of his Lord, “who was meek and lowly “ in heart.” - T H E E N D. *******、、。; 3:1, și， șº§ ¶ ¡ ¿ :：：：:：::::::：:：:}} }}§§§§§§§ ∞ √≠√∞ √≠ ≤ §§§§§ | 5074758676 ii | | i | ;№Ě | | §§ UNIVERsity o | | | ·****---- · ¿¿.* ſaeſſae; —·:·———~~~~