thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto me that is to be Ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."* And how was this prophecy fulfilled? Joseph and Mary had taken up their residence in Nazareth of Galilee, which lay at least seventy miles north from Jerusalem, while Bethlehem was situated some miles to the south. Had the pious pair, when the time drew near that Mary should be delivered, gone intentionally to the appointed place, the truth of prophecy would have been established by their voluntary agency. But it does not appear that they had formed such a design, or that the propriety of it had ever occurred to them. God had purposed to accomplish his word, not by the instrumentality of persons who should knowingly co-operate with him, but by a man who was ignorant of prophecy, and had never heard of the Messiah. Augustus, sitting on the throne of the Roman world, issues a decree that all his subjects should be taxed or enrolled. The design of Cæsar is to replenish his treasury with their silver and gold, or to ascertain their number and wealth, that he may be acquainted with his resources against any future emergency. The design of God is to bring Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem, to which the descendants of David were commanded to repair, that their names might he inserted in the family register. Augustus thought only of gratifying his avarice or ambition: God thought of fulfilling his word. We see the whole empire in motion, and thousands hastening, every man to his own city, at the command of their sovereign, and we are apt to look upon this mighty bustle merely as a political movement. But God is the prime mover, and his object is to conduct, without noise and without a miracle, two of the humblest of the emperor's subjects to a small city, in a distant province, because he had determined, and by the mouths of his prophets had foretold, that there the Messiah should be born.

As his birth corresponded, in all its circumstances, with the ancient predictions, so did every other particular in his history. Our limits will not permit me to enter into a minute detail. According to the descriptions of the prophets, there would be a wonderful mixture in his character, of humiliation and greatness, of suffering and triumph. To the Jews, who have adopted false notions respecting his person and work, the language of the Old Testament is a riddle which they are sadly puzzled to explain; and hence some of their doctors have had recourse to the supposition of two Messiahs, to whom they assign the different parts of the description, as it seems impossible that they should admit of an application to the same individual. The one will be of the tribe of Ephraim, and will suffer and die; the other will be of the tribe of Judah, and will conquer and reign. I need not spend a single moment in refuting an hypothesis which is supported solely by the authority of men, whose comments on Scripture furnish the most pitiable display of ignorance (and stupidity) which the world ever saw. The character of Jesus of Nazareth affords a full solution of the difficulty, which has compelled them to have recourse to this wretched expedient. In his human nature, which, like ours, existed at first in the feebleness of infancy, and when it grew up to manhood was placed in circumstances of poverty and degradation, we see the fulfilment of what had been spoken concerning his humiliation; and the predictions of his greatness are accomplished in the dignity of his person, which, although made flesh, and concealed, in a great measure, from the eyes of men, retained the glory which it had with the Father before the world began. The incompatibility of his sufferings with his triumph, exists only in the dreams of the Jews. They were not simultaneous, but successive; his course commenced in darkness, and ended in light; he first became obedient to death, even the death of the cross, and then he obtained a name above every name, which all

* Micah v. 2.

the powers of earth and heaven adore. He sits at the right hand of his Father, and his enemies are made his footstool. It were easy to show, by a reference to the prophecies, that there is not one particular of his sufferings recorded by the evangelists, which had not been pointed out beforehand; so that there is not a mere resemblance between the character of Jesus Christ, and that of the Messiah, but an exact coincidence; a coincidence in so many minute circumstances, that it could not have taken place by accident, and can be explained only by the identity of the person. It could not happen by chance that, agreeably to the ancient predictions, he was betrayed by one of his own followers, sold for thirty pieces of silver, buffeted, scourged, and spit upon; that he was condemned by the common consent of his own countrymen and the Gentiles; that he was put to death by crucifixion, which was not a Jewish punishment, and in company with criminals; that vinegar was given to him during his last sufferings, and his clothes were partly divided, and partly disposed of by lot; that he was insulted by his enemies, and, in particular, derided for his faith; that he was pierced with a spear; and finally, that, although it was intended to bury him along with his fellow-sufferers, his body was deposited in the sepulchre of a rich man. It would have required the co-operation of many persons to bring all these circumstances together by design; but as the agents had nothing in view, except to gratify their own feelings, we perceive the hand of God pointing out his own Son as the object of our faith, by fulfilling whatsoever his counsel had determined before to be done.

The messiahship of Jesus is farther manifest from the wonderful works which he performed. These prove that he was the expected Redeemer, because it was foretold that his advent should be signalized by works at once beneficent and divine: "Behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped: then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing."* Hence the Jews expected such signs to be exhibited by the Messiah, as we learn from the words of some of them who believed in him, and said, "When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?" But farther, these miracles prove him to be the Messiah, because they were express attestations to his character by his Father, in concurrence with whom he performed them. Hence he appeals to them as such: "The works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father himself,

which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me." And again, when the Jews were filled with indignation, and threatened to stone him, because he called himself the Son of God, he said to them, "If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works; that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him."§ The argument from miracles is well understood. Whether we consider those of our Saviour as performed by his own power, or by that of his Father, we arrive at the same conclusion. If they were performed by his own power, they prove that he was a divine person, to whose declarations concerning himself, implicit confidence is due. If they were performed by the power of his Father, they were his solemn attestation to the mission and doctrine of Christ. The allegation of the Jews, that his miracles were wrought by the assistance of evil spirits, had no better foundation than their ignorance and malignity; their ignorance-in supposing that those spirits could perform real miracles, and particularly such miracles as displayed an uncontrolled dominion + Ib. v. 36, 37. § Ib. x. 37, 38.

Is. xxxv. 4-6. ↑ John vii. 31.

B

over all nature; their malignity-in ascribing to them, in opposition to the clearest dictates of reason and religion, works confessedly benevolent and holy. Certainly they would not have changed the course of nature to advance the glory of God, and the best interests of the human race. The answer of our Saviour must have carried conviction to any candid mind: "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth. If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub." The last argument by which we prove that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, is founded on the success of his religion. Let us reflect upon the circumstances in which it was promulgated. The Author of it was a person rejected by the only nation which expected the Messiah, and knew anything. about his character; and, by that nation, he was not only pronounced to be a deceiver, but subjected to an ignominious death; so that there was every human probability that his name would be soon forgotten, or be remembered only as an object of reproach. No person could have dreamed, that a man who had been crucified as a malefactor in a distant province, would acquire such posthumous fame, as to be acknowledged and adored in the proud capital of Rome, and throughout the whole extent of the empire: whether we consider the nature of his doctrine, the persons who were employed in preaching it, or the opposition which it had to encounter, there was no likelihood that it would ever attain a footing in the world; and still less, that it would become the dominant religion. His doctrine was offensive to all classes of men, because it interfered with their opinions and usages, and called upon them, not only to adopt a new creed, but to engage in a new course of life to which they felt the utmost repugnance. The preachers could not give it the recommendation which a system derives from the rank and authority of its patrons, and the eloquence and learning which they enlist in its service; for they were of a low rank, and wanted all the qualifications which attract the notice and admiration of mankind. These were its only or its chief friends, when it appeared; all other men were leagued together as its enemies; the high, the mighty, and the wise; the rulers of states, and the interested ministers of the various superstitions which were established on the earth. In whatever way we may account for its wonderful success in circumstances which foreboded a certain failure, it supplies a new evidence in support of the claim of Jesus of Nazareth to the character of Messiah. If its success should be attributed to its intrinsic excellence, what but truth could take such hold of the minds and consciences of men, as to command their assent, notwithstanding strong motives to reject it? If we say that it was the effect of Divine, power, exerted not only in miracles, but in secret influences upon the hearts of men, we acknowledge that the gospel is authenticated by the seal of God, and that he who preached it was his Son.

It deserves, in particular, to be considered, that the doctrine of Christ has been embraced by the Gentiles, and has caused a great revolution in the religious state of the world. The law of Moses was confined to the Jews, and a few proselytes who occasionally submitted to it; it was not intended to be universal, and its peculiar usages rendered it impossible that it should ever become the religion of mankind. But it was foretold of the Messiah, that he should be "a light to enlighten the Gentiles, as well as the glory of his people Israel;" "the heathen would be given to him for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession;""the isles would wait for his law ;" and, " from the rising of the sun, to the going down of the same, the name of God would be great among the Gentiles." Of the fulfilment of Ps. ii. 8. § Is. xlii. 4. I Mal. i. 11.

Luke xi. 17, 18. † Luke ii. 32.

and

these predictions, there was no appearance for many centuries after they were uttered; but they have been fulfilled since the coming of our Saviour. As he gave a commission to the apostles to preach the gospel to every creature, they extended their labours beyond the limits of Judea, so his religion has ever since been professed by nations converted from heathenism. By the propagation of the gospel, the ancient idolatry has been overthrown, the knowledge of the true God has been diffused, and his worship established; his law has been promulgated as the only standard of right and wrong, and men have been taught to expect salvation only through his crucified Son. His kingdom does not yet extend "from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth;" but what has been accomplished, encourages us to hope for greater things; and we look forward to the time when he shall achieve the conquest of the whole earth, and be acknowledged and honoured as universal Lord.

These are the principal arguments by which we prove, against the Jews, that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah. I have omitted many par ticulars which might have been introduced under the general heads, and given you only a superficial view of the subject. What has been said, is sufficient to confirm our faith in this fundamental article of religion. The character of Messiah includes several offices to which our Saviour was anointed, and by the execution of which he accomplishes the salvation of his people. These we shall afterwards consider; but, in the mean time, it is necessary to inquire into the mysterious constitution of his person, by which he was qualified for those offices, and which is intimately connected with his messiahship, in the creed and confession of the Church. "We believe and are sure that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."* This important point will be the subject of the next lecture.

LECTURE LIII.

ON THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

The human nature of Christ-Heretical opinions respecting it-Integrity of it-Its sinlessness -Necessity of his assumption of human nature-The constitution of his person, by the union of the divine and human natures-Effects of this hypostatical union.

HAVING proved that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah promised to the Fathers, I proceed to speak of his person, before I enter upon the consideration of his particular offices. To a Jew, it would seem that this inquiry is unne cessary, or may be reduced to narrow limits, it being enough to know his human descent, as there is no distinction between him and other men, except in his high destination, his superior endowments, and his splendid achievements. Some professed Christians are of the same opinion, and maintain, that he who was born in the fulness of time, was in every respect a man like ourselves. It is certain, however, that the expectations of the ancient people of God pointed to a nobler object, in consequence of the declarations of the prophets, that the Redeemer of Israel should be one who might be called JEHOVAH our righteousness," and "Immanuel," which signifies "God with us." Our own Scriptures are still more explicit, and, in language which does not admit of a figurative interpretation, inform us, that it was the Word who "was God," and "by whom all things were created," that was "made flesh

* John vi. 69.

66

and dwelt among us;" that it was the Son of God who was made of a woman; and that he who came of the Jews, according to the flesh, was "God over all, blessed for ever." These, and many other passages, import that in him the divine and the human nature were united; so that of the same person it may be affirmed with truth, that he is the fellow or the equal of the Lord of hosts, and the kinsman and brother of the children of the dust.

This article of our religion has been opposed with great violence in every age, and by heretics of various descriptions. It is the rock on which the Church is built, and the powers of darkness have exerted their utmost efforts to overthrow it. It is not necessary to review those opinions, which aimed at subverting the foundations of our faith by denying the divinity of Christ, whether he was affirmed by the Ebionites, and others, to be a mere man, Los argos, or at a later period by the Arians, to be a secondary deity; because we have formerly proved that he is God, equal to the Father. Our present design only requires that we should take notice of the errors which immediately related to the constitution of his person as vos, God and man.

Let us begin with the consideration of the nature which he assumed. And here we are met by two opinions which were vented in the primitive times, in opposition to the common faith of Christians, founded on the authority of Scripture. The first is that of the Docetæ, who were so called on account of their distinguishing tenet, that our Saviour was not a man in reality, but in appearance only. It was held by different individuals and sects; but, as they concurred in this opinion with respect to the Christ, they received in ancient times this common designation. According to them, what was supposed to be the man Christ Jesus, was a mere phantom, and his crucifixion was a scenical representation, by which the senses of the spectators were imposed upon. It surely is not necessary to attempt an elaborate refutation of a heresy so manifestly contrary to the most explicit declarations of Scripture. "Forasmuch," says an apostle, "as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself took part of the same.' There is no reason why we should listen for a moment to men who give the lie direct to an inspired writer, and would persuade us that, for the space of more than thirty years, God, for no conceivable end, deceived the Jewish nation by a series of miracles, (for it was only by miracle that they could be made for so long a time to think that a shadow was a solid substance ;) and that our hope of salvation by the death of our Redeemer is vain, as he did not shed his blood for us, and, in truth, had no blood to shed. The second opinion, destructive of the human nature of Christ, is said to have been maintained by Arius and Eunomius, who affirmed that he had a body, but not a soul, and that the Logos, or his superior nature, supplied its place. Apollinaris, or Apollinarius, also taught that the Son of God assumed manhood without a soul, fuxns ave, as Socrates relates; but afterwards, changing his mind, he said that he assumed a soul, but that it did not possess the intelligent or rational principle, νυν δε ουκ έχειν αυτήν ; and that they was instead of that principle, VT VCU.t Human nature he conceived to consist of three parts, a body, a soul, and a mind, of which the latter was wanting in our Saviour. The contrariety of both opinions to Scripture is apparent, and particularly of the former, which affirms that he had no soul. Besides that it is expressly mentioned by himself, when he said in his agony," My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,"‡ and when, on the cross, he committed it to his Father, there is the same evidence that he possessed this essential part of our nature, as there is that it belongs to any other man; his thoughts, his reasonings, his feelings, his affections, his joys. and sorrows, his hopes and fears, being all indications of the existence of that + Matt. xxvi, 38,

• Heb. ii. 14, † Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. ii. c, 44.