I am not unaware, that a large portion of the Christian Church has considered the naming of the child, Immanuel, a prophecy of Christ, and an assertion, that, superadded to his human, he should have a divine nature; but as far as I can see, without the least reason. Such a prophecy would not have answered the very purpose for which it was given, as a sign to Ahaz. "How," asks Professor Stuart, of Andover, "how could the birth of Jesus, which happened seven hundred and forty-two years afterwards, be a sign to Ahaz, that within three years his country should be freed from its enemies? Such a child, as it would seem, was born at that period, for in the next chapter he is referred to twice, as if then present."

But it is asked, How could this transaction be referred to by Matthew, in connection with the birth of Jesus? "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, A virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel." Now nothing of this kind really took place at the birth of Jesus, and no such name was given him. The name given to him by divine command, was Jesus. God never commanded him to be called Immanuel. All then, that this citation from the Old Testament can mean, is this, that there is a similarity between the two events. Is it asked how the writers of the New Testament could quote the Old, in that way, where there was no real prophecy? We can only answer, that such was the custom at that time. The same accommodation of the language of the Old Testament to the

events of the New, occurs in the next chapter of Matthew. Joseph took the child and his mother, and fled to Egypt, and, after a season, returned; and a reason of this movement is given, "that it might be fulfilled that was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." Now, at first sight, you might suppose this to be a prophecy, and a prophecy fulfilled. But if we look for it in the Old Testament, we find it in the eleventh chapter of Hosea. "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Here, we all perceive, is no prophecy, but only an allusion to a historical fact, in which all the nation of Israel are called God's son. Still the same language is used in both cases, "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying." Either both are prophecies, or the language does not prove either of them prophetical, but only to be quoted by way of coincidence and accommodation.

The inference which all of you, who have listened attentively to this argument, must have drawn, is, that the evidence in favor of the doctrine of the Trinity, to be derived from the seventh and ninth chapters of Isaiah, is exceedingly small in amount; that small as it is, it will not bear examination for a moment. It follows, that if the Deity of Christ cannot be proved from what he was, and did, and said, in the New Testament, the attempt to establish his Deity is hopeless.

How little confidence is to be placed in arguments drawn from names, of which Jehovah makes a part, may be learned from a comparison of the sixth verse of

the twenty-third chapter of Jeremiah, with the sixteenth verse of the thirty-third chapter. "In his days Judah shall be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell in safety; and this is the name whereby he shall be called, Jehovah our righteousness.'" This is appealed to as a triumphant argument for the Deity of Christ, until the reader passes on to the thirty-third chapter, and there he finds the same name applied to Jerusalem ! "In those days Judah shall be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our righteousness.'"

What the Jews really thought, as to the unity of God and the Deity of the Messiah, may perhaps be learned as accurately as from any other source, from two visions, which I am now about to recite, one from the sixth chapter of Isaiah, and one from Daniel. "In the year that Uzziah died, I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the Seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he covered his face, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another and said, Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone, for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for mine eyes have seen the king, the Lord of hosts." Here then is the Deity, as he was conceived of by the Jews, one indivisible being, seated like a king upon a throne

Is there the least hint of anything like a Trinity about him? Not the least shadow.

The other vision is in the seventh chapter of Daniel : "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the fine wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. I saw, in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man, came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."

If there be any prophecy of Christ in the Old Testament, this is it, and I leave any one to say, if there is not a sufficient distinction kept up between the Ancient of days, on whom myriads attended, and the person in human form, who came near before him, and received from the Ancient of days, dominion, and glory, and a kingdom?

Perhaps there will be no more appropriate place, in the course of these lectures, than this, to notice certain other passages of the Old Testament which have been regarded as prophetic of Christ, and have been thought at the same time to assert the doctrine of his Deity. One of the strongest of these is found in the third chap

ter of Malachi. "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom ye delight; behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of Hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire and a fuller's soap. And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years. And I will come near to you in judgment, saith the Lord of Hosts."

After the most careful examination of this passage, it is difficult to find any certain evidence that the Messiah is referred to at all in it. There are circumstances in it, which make the whole passage agree much better with the old dispensation than with the new, and lead the candid inquirer to refer whatever events are predicted in it, to some reformation in the times of the second temple, before the destruction of the Levitical priesthood, rather than to the new economy. This chapter is nearly connected with the preceding, and they both seem to relate to the degeneracy of the sacerdotal order, and the neglect of the appointed offerings by the people. "Will a man rob God? yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, wherein have we robbed thee? In tythes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tythes into the storehouse,