four different histories of the same transactions, without differing essentially in their statements. Now, the four Gospels (laying for the present out of view their claim to inspiration,) are just exactly four such histories. They profess to be mere narratives of fact, without either inference or comment. Surely the writers had sufficient access to information: for two of the four were the constant and intimate companions of Him whose life they write; and the other two were associates of such persons, writing under their superintendence and direction. We never think of doubting, that the statements, which two of the scholars of a Greek philosopher have published concerning him, are trustworthy and accurate; and why should we distrust the account given by four disciples of Christ, of what was spoken, and done, and suffered, by their Master? Does it not greatly strengthen the testimony of each, that, upon the leading features of the transactions which they record, they fully and entirely agree? They differ, indeed, from each other in some minute particulars: but does not this always happen, when honest men are stating each his own views and impressions of a transaction, which has come within his own knowledge? Would not a juryman place far more confidence in four witnesses, who, agreeing in all great points, should state some little circumstances differently, than if they all told their tale, from beginning to end, with such exact conformity of phrase and statement, as might have been the effect of previous concert among themselves?—If the writers of the Gospel histories had access to abundant information on the subject of which they treat, it only remains for us to inquire, whether we have any grounds to impute dishonest intentions to them? Can they have given to the world as true, what they themselves well knew to be false? We can scarcely figure to ourselves a supposition more destitute of all show of probability, than that it should have entered into the mind of a few peasants and fishermen, in the despised country of Judea, to league together, for the purpose of publishing a mere fable, as the life of a teacher of wisdom and righteousness. How could they have ever felt any inclination to attempt what was so utterly be

yond their province? How could they ever have supposed themselves qualified in any respect to succeed in so wild an attempt? If so strange a conception had entered into their minds at all, it must have been suggested to them, one would think, either by a strong sense of personal interest, or by an enthusiastic attachment to the glory of their country, or at least by some eager adherence to previous opinions of their own. But the history of Jesus Christ contains in itself abundant proof, that their personal interest could never be promoted by acknowledging his authority, and walking in his steps. He is represented as living a life of poverty and suffering, and as holding forth to his disciples no better prospects in this world. The enthusiasm, which a Jew felt for his country's glory, would have tended to separate him from a teacher, who commanded to "render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar's;" for there was nothing so intolerable to the national pride of Judea, as the yoke which the Roman emperors had laid upon it.-The previous opinions and wishes of the apostles, too, were all in direct opposition to the facts, which are recorded by them in the Gospel history. They did indeed expect, that, about the time when Jesus Christ was born, there should appear a promised messenger of God, the Messiah. But they expected that this Messiah should prove a conquering prince, surrounded with affluence and splendour: every step of whose brilliant career should be the very reverse of what they themselves have recorded as the tenor of their Master's life. They expected also, that Messiah should confirm the authority of the ceremonial law. Nor can any thing be imagined more adverse to the whole tone of their previous feelings, than the doctrine, that all who worship God may worship him, not in Jerusalem only, but wherever the tribute of spirit and of truth can be offered.-Granting, however, that all this had been otherwise; granting it to be probable that afew fishermen of Galilee should combine to palm upon the world a literary forgery; and that they really had some object of personal or national interest to accomplish by it; granting that the previous bent of their own minds had been in perfect concordance with the

statements of the history which they published ;-what possible chance of success had they in such an attempt ? They could not hope to escape the strictest examination. Indeed, their statement was of a kind, which seemed to court inquiry. The transaction, which they professed to record, was not one of distant date. Not only had they themselves borne a part in it; but it might have been witnessed, and might well be remembered, by every reader of their narrative at its first publication. It was not a thing which had "been done in a corner." It is described as having occurred chiefly in the capital city of their land, in its most public places of resort, and among its most public solemnities. The wise, and the learned, and the powerful, of the nation are represented as having keenly watched over it, and as having done every thing in their power to discountenance and to crush it. But how were their exertions directed? Amidst all their zeal and all their power, there is no proof of their having ever denied the mere facts of the Gospel history. They attempt to put their own gloss upon them, but never think of calling their existence in question. They do not deny that Jesus Christ cured diseases miraculously; though they declare it as their own opinion, that he performed these wonderful works through the power of Satan. They do not deny that his body disappeared from the tomb, which once contained it, and which they themselves had secured with every precaution; though they declare it as their opinion, that the body was stolen by his disciples, while a guard of Roman soldiers slept upon their post. For all these statements the writers of the Gospels were alive to be responsible, at the time when the history was published. Yet, though force was employed with some of them, to change their opinions, none of them, so far as we know, were ever asked or expected to change their narrative. To what would all this amount in our own day? If any four men, in our own immediate neighbourhood, should publish the history of a transaction, stated to have taken place, in the streets and public assemblies of the city of Edinburgh, four or five years ago; if these transactions were represented to be of a kind, which had most powerfully

attracted the notice of all ranks of men; if all the learned and all the powerful of our land, instead of considering these histories as beneath their regard, were to show the strongest inclination to overthrow their credit and to counteract their efficacy ;—unless such histories were true, how would it be possible for them to gain belief for a moment? Inquiry would be the most easy thing imaginable. Detection of falsehood would be immediate. The whole weight of public scorn and indignation would crush the imposture into utter forgetfulness. Or, if it were permitted to go down to posterity at all, there would go down along with it the most clear, and decisive, and triumphant, exposure of its fallacy. If nothing of this kind has happened, when the circumstances were exactly similar, in regard to the four Gospels, what inference can reason or candour draw, but that the facts which the Gospels record are true? Brunton.

ON THE PROPHECIES REGARDING CHRIST.

ONE of the most striking circumstances, connected with the Christian dispensation, is the long and singular train of prophecy, by which it was ushered into the world. These remarkable predictions, delivered in various ages, were committed to the custody of a chosen people, whose whole history and present condition have themselves been justly accounted miraculous. The events foretold, though in some instances of a most extraordinary nature, and, before their actual occurrence, apparently irreconcilable with each other, were all brought to pass, in the person of Jesus Christ, hundreds of years after they were predicted,—at a time when, in consequence of these prophecies, there was a strong expectation of the promised Deliverer, and by means of agents not at all interested in their completion. The predictions relate to all the important circumstances in Messiah's history,-his preexistent state, the family of which he was to be born,the time, place, and other circumstances of his nativity,his external rank and condition,-his divine inspiration,

-his moral character,-his offices,-his miraculous works, his last sufferings, death, and burial,—his resurrection and ascension,—and other remarkable events which were to follow his .-I. With respect appearance.to Messiah's PRE-EXISTENT STATE, the Prophets tell us in the plainest manner, that the hour of his earthly birth was not to be the commencement of his being. Thus Micah declares, that out of the town of Bethlehem Ephratah, shall he come forth, that is to be ruler in Israel: whose goings forth have been of old FROM EVERLASTING. They speak moreover of Messiah's equality with God. Thus Zechariah in a memorable passage, cited by our blessed Lord, on the eve of his death, as applicable to himself, breaks out in the following remarkable words, Awake, O Sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man that is MY FELLOW, saith the Lord of Hosts. They tell us still further that he is God himself. Thus Isaiah announces, Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name IMMANUEL; which being interpreted, as the Evangelist Matthew explains, is God with us. And again the same Prophet declares, Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, THE MIGHTY GOD, The everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.-When Jesus of Nazareth, accordingly, appeared upon earth, he spake of his own pre-existence. He told the Jews, Before Abraham was, I am ;" and, in addressing his Father, he referred to that glory, which he had with him, before the world was. He declared, that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father; and it was imputed to him by the Jews as blasphemy, that he made himself equal with God. In still more express terms, he asserted his own divinity, saying, "I and my Father are one :" "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father." But it may naturally be asked, in what manner he established his claim to this high character, and by what signs he manifested his divinity. To this it is answered, that he exhibited every one evidence and seal of his divinity, which imagination can suggest, or the nature of the claim can possibly admit,-by performing preterhuman works,by penetrating the secrets of the heart,-by teaching sublimer truths and purer doctrines, than had ever fallen

L