4. The admonitions which Christ is represented to have given to his followers to save themselves by flight, are not easily accounted for upon the supposition of the prophecy being fabricated after the event. Either the Christians, when the siege approached, did make their escape from Jerusalem, or they did not: if they did, they must have had the prophecy amongst them if they did not know of any such prediction at the time of the siege, if they did not take notice of any such warning, it was an improbable fiction, in a writer publishing his work near to that time (which, upon any even the lowest and most disadvantageous supposition, was the case with the gospels now in our hands) and addressing his work to Jews and to Jewish converts (which Matthew certainly did), to state that the followers of Christ had received admonitions, of which they made no use when the occasion arrived, and of which, experience then recent proved, that those, who were most concerned to know and regard them, were ignorant or negligent. Even if the prophecies came to the hands of the evangelists through no better vehicle than tradition, it must have been by a tradition which subsisted prior to the event. And to suppose, that without any authority whatever, without so much as even any tradition to guide them, they had forged these passages, is to impute to them a degree of fraud and imposture, from every appearance of which their compositions are as far removed as possible.

5. I think that, if the prophecies had been composed after the event, there would have been more specification. The names or descriptions of the enemy, the general, the emperor, would have been found in them. The designation of the time would have been more determinate. And I am fortified in this opinion by observing, that the counterfeited prophecies of the Sibylline oracles, of the twelve patriarchs, and, I am in

1 Luke xxi. 20, 21. When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh; then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let them which are in the midst of it depart out, and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.'

Matt. xiv. 18. When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then let them which be in Judea flee unto the mountains; let him which is on the house-top not come down to take any thing out of his house, neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.'

clined to believe, most others of the kind, are mere transcripts of the history, moulded into a prophetic form.

It is objected that the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem is mixed, or connected, with expressions which relate to the final judgment of the world; and so connected, as to lead an ordinary reader to expect, that these two events would not be far distant from each other. To which I answer, that the objection does not concern our present argument. If our Saviour actually foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, it is sufficient; even although we should allow, that the narration of the prophecy had combined together what had been said by him upon kindred subjects, without accurately preserving the order, or always noticing the transition of the discourse.

ANNOTATIONS.

It is important to keep in mind that there are FOUR points requisite to establish the claim of any alleged Prophecy to pro

ceed from a divine revelation:

(1) It must have been delivered prior to the event.1

(2) It must correspond precisely with the event; and must not be in such vague and general language as the predictions in vulgar Almanacs; that a certain great personage is likely to have cause for uneasiness,' &c.

(3) It must be something beyond mere human sagacity. This rule precludes the predictions of eclipses, &c.

(4) It must be a prediction that could not have caused its own fulfilment, by suggesting to some one who knew of it, a corresponding procedure.

For instance, our Lord's riding into Jerusalem in the manner that had been foretold, only indicated his claiming to be the Messiah, but did not establish his claim; since it was what any one could have done. But the other predictions respecting Him depended for their accomplishment on his adversaries, or on some superhuman power.

1 Bacon, in his Essay on Prophecies, remarks that many which have passed for such, were probably framed after the event.

It is worth remarking, in reference to this subject, that there is a passage in the 2d Epistle of Peter which seems to represent him (through an error in our Version) as attributing more weight, as evidence, to Prophecies, than to the miraculous signs of which he had been eye-witness. But our Translators did not well understand the force of the Greek Article; an attention to which will clearly show the true sense of the Original, which is, 'We have the Word of Prophecy more sure;' i. e. made, by the fulfilment of it, more clear than when it was uttered.1

It is worth remarking also that the passage occurring shortly after, 'No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,' does not express the sense of the Original.

The right sense, I cannot doubt, of the whole passage, is, 'We have the Word of Prophecy confirmed' [viz., by the event fulfilling it]: for no prophecy is to be interpreted by the words themselves in which it is written [γραφῆς ἰδίας επιλύσεως] (but by the event), for it came not by man's device,' [i. e., if men had been left to their own judgment, they would have probably foretold things quite plainly,] 'but as they were moved by the Spirit of God' [whose decree was, that the clear and full understanding of the predictions should not take place at the time when they were uttered.]

It is worth observing, too, that if we look to the fulfilled prophecies of our Lord's coming, they were obscure and doubtful till they were fulfilled. However plain they may appear to us now, it is certain that the whole, or very near the whole, of the Jewish people mistook their meaning, and that the greater part of them rejected the Christ when He did come, precisely because He did not fulfil the expectations which they had founded on their interpretation of the prophecies. Some few, very cautious men, among them, perhaps said within themselves, 'God has promised us a deliverer; but what kind of a deliverer

1 ἔχομεν βεβαιότερον τὸν προφητικὸν λόγον: not τὸν προφητικὸν λόγον, τὸν βεβαιότερον, which would have expressed the sense of our Version.

2 The Apostle is now contrasting prophecies of Holy Scripture with any OTHER prophecies: nor would he, had such been his meaning, have said ypapis, but (according to invariable usage) THE уpapñs. Doubtless the word lõías agrees, not with ἐπιλύσεως, but with γραφής, which is governed by ἐπιλύσεως.

he will be, and what will be the blessings he is to bring, we cannot clearly see; we will patiently wait the event.'

And others again (like most of the disciples), though they had formed expectations of a temporal Messiah, yielded humbly and candidly to the evidence of Christ's miracles, and submitted to learn from Him. When He did come, then a practical question arose. Before his coming there was nothing to be done, in consequence of interpreting the prophecies this way or that. But when a person appeared who was supposed to be the Christ, then it became a duty to examine his claims, and either reject Him as an impious impostor, or acknowledge and submit to Him as from heaven. And as soon as men were thus called on to act, observe what a blaze of light is bestowed, in contrast to the faint twilight which prevailed before, when nothing practical was involved. Jesus wrought such miracles that his opponents were compelled to refer them to the agency of demons. None but the obstinately prejudiced could have any doubt of his divine mission.

And this is just of a piece with the general character of God's teaching. Speculative matters are touched on slightly and obscurely; but practical questions are made plain to every candid mind.

The prophecies concerning Christ's coming were, before He did come, very obscure; and the right interpretation of them was not necessary for practice: after He was come, and when they were fulfilled, the right interpretation of them became a matter of the highest practical importance; and then, the event made them clear to every fair inquirer.

'Our Lord's predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem.

It is a most remarkable point in this prophecy and its accompanying directions, that the disciples were directed to fly, not as soon as the war should break out, but when Jerusalem should be encompassed with armies;' which might be expected -humanly speaking-to intercept their flight.

Now how stands the event? The Roman army, when encamped before the city, was seized with a strange and sudden panic, such as no one could have conjectured; and made a hasty retreat. This afforded a triumph to the Jewish warriors;

though only temporary, as the Romans soon returned; but the interval allowed the escape of the Christians.

And this proves-among other things-that the prophecy could not have been forged after the event. For if the Christians did-as no doubt was the fact-conform to the precept given, this could have been only in consequence of that precept; since otherwise their conduct in doing so would have been unaccountable. And if it be supposed that they did not adopt that course, then, a forger of a feigned prophecy would not have inserted a direction that had not been complied with.

CHAPTER II.

The Morality of the Gospel.

stating the morality of the Gospel as an argument of its

teaching of morality was not the primary design of the mission; secondly, that morality, neither in the Gospel, nor in any other book, can be a subject, properly speaking, of discovery.

If I were to describe in a very few words the scope of Christianity, as a revelation,' I should say, that it was to influence the conduct of human life, by establishing the proof of a future state of reward and punishment-'to bring life and immortality to light.' The direct object, therefore, of the design is, to supply motives, and not rules; sanctions, and not precepts. And

'Great and inestimably beneficial effects may accrue from the mission of Christ, and especially from his death, which do not belong to Christianity as a revelation; that is, they might have existed, and they might have been accomplished, though we had never, in this life, been made acquainted with them. These effects may be very extensive. They may be interesting even to other orders of intelligent Beings. I think it is a general opinion, and one to which I have long come, that the beneficial effects of Christ's death extend to the whole human species. It was the redemption of the world. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the whole world.'-1 John ii. 2. Probably the future happiness, perhaps the future existence of the species, and more gracious terms of acceptance extended to all, might depend upon it, or be procured by it. Now these effects, whatever they be, do not belong to Christianity as a revelation; because they exist with respect to those to whom it is not revealed.