Moses had recorded

when he declared seed of the woman

pected of having derived the new light which he threw upon the subject, by inferences gathered from the casual hints of those who had preceded him. The links are all intimately and mutually connected, but yet so, that it is evident that each individual must have independently formed and added his own to the series. the earliest promise of God unto the serpent that the should bruise his head, and we have seen those words literally fulfilled in Jesus Christ who was born of a pure virgin. But who that was not a prophet could, previous to that accomplishment, have seen the necessity of thus limiting their sense, or have dared to pronounce, without the inspiration of God, that a virgin should conceive and bear a son-that a woman should compass a man. This promise of the Messiah was afterwards limited to the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But who could, from this circumstance alone, have drawn the information that the Saviour should spring from the loins of David, and first shine upon the world in the small and inconspicuous village of Bethlehem? Or grant all these things known, and who could yet have fixed with Daniel the true and exact period of his appearance, or have pronounced, with Micah,* that the Lord "would send his Messenger to

* Micah iii.

prepare his way before him." All these prophets added something essential to what had been before revealed concerning Christ. Yet could they not have consulted together in their deceit, because they flourished at different periods. Neither could they have copied or enlarged their descriptions from the writings of former prophets, because the things which they separately revealed were not necessarily implied in what went before, and were often but remotely, if at all, connected with each other. They all preserve the common and leading characters of the Lord of Righteousness in their descriptions, in order to fix the identity of the person to whom they refer; but they all, at the same time, contribute some peculiar and original designation, in order to mark the independence and continuity of their own heavenly communications.

The third remark, therefore, which I would make upon these predictions, is this. That the character of the Messiah was not drawn in them at once, and at full length; but was sketched at different periods and by different hands, each adding a distinct and unborrowed feature,' till the whole

A very interesting Dissertation might be formed, pointing out the circumstances which each prophet successively added to the predictions of his predecessors, and shewing that these circumstances were neither necessarily implied, nor could by inference be gathered from what had been written before.

was finished and detailed with that fulness and perspicuity in which we now behold it in the records of the Old when compared with the fulfilments of the New Testament.

4. Lastly, many of these prophecies were such as an impostor unaided and unapproved by God, however willing, could never have been able to accomplish; for they were to be fulfilled not only by, but in the person of the Messiah. There were many things not only to be done but suffered by him, things which wholly depended upon the will and actions of others, and over which he himself could exercise no control. Any ́one, whose wish or interest it had been to practise the delusion, might have imitated many of the marks of the Messiah, might have personated the character of a Redeemer in Israel, and assumed the glorious names of "the Wonderful, Counsellor, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." He might have lived in a state of wretchedness and poverty, and have made himself of no reputation, and taken upon him the form of a servant, and become a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. He might even have given up his life an offering for sin. But could he have moulded the passions of others to his purpose? Could he have made his name to be despised and rejected of men? Could he have been born and have

suffered at a particular time and place, and in a particular and miraculous manner? Could he have caused them to look on him whom they had pierced, or to divide his raiment, or to cast lots upon his vesture, or to prevent a bone of his body from being broken? Could he have performed those wonders which marked both the entrance of our Saviour into life, and his departure from it again unto his Father? Preach the Gospel to the poor he might, and so do we; but could he have confirmed his preaching by the testimony of works following, by the healing of the sick and giving sight to the blind? Yet these things had the prophet Isaiah declared that the Messiah should do; but the power to perform them is of God alone, and whoever, therefore, possesses that power, must possess it by the ordinance of God, as a discriminating mark of his appointment to a peculiar office.

Seeing then that the prophecies concerning the Messiah were in number so multiplied; in their promulgation so gradual; in their nature so varied and minute; and combining into the delineation of one single character, circumstances so distinct and almost opposite to each other, we undeniably conclude, that he who fairly and fully accomplished them all, was doubtless that particular personage whom they were intended to

prefigure and represent. Such a man was Jesus of Nazareth, that man of wonders, whom we have already beheld as a man approved of God. He was born of a Virgin; born in Bethlehem; born at the appointed time, when all men were looking for the Consolation of Israel. His messenger went before him and he came suddenly to his temple, in the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and of might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord. He lived, he died, he was buried, he rose again and ascended up on high, according to the Scriptures. As his miracles and doctrines prove him to be a prophet, so from the Scriptures, therefore, he may be shewn to be the prophet Christ. "The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy," and here at length we may close the direct and positive evidences of Christianity with satisfaction to our minds.

Poor and idle indeed must have been that speculation, unworthy any wise, most of all unbecoming any Christian man, which leads to no practical consequences, "which ministereth not to godly edifying," which imprints upon the heart no deeper sentiments of adoration to God, which raises in us no livelier feelings of charity to man, which terminates in no beneficial effects upon the holiness of our life here, or the happiness of our life hereafter.

"For of every idle word that men