LECTURE XXIV.

PROOFS OF CHRISTIANITY ARISING FROM PROPHECY.

Ir is well known, that the Jewish nation have for a long time possessed certain Scriptures which they deem sacred. That these were not the consequence of Christianity, but were extant before the existence of such a religion, will be readily conceded by any person of integrity and information. Parts of these writings are prophetic. Their authors profess to be divinely inspired, and boldly foretell future events.

Among these predictions are some descriptive of a very extraordinary character. The uncommonness of their character is a circumstance not slightly to be passed over. A pretended prophet might, with tolerable safety, foretell that after an indefinite number of years, a military chief, or eminent philosopher would make his appearance. Characters of this kind have been in considerable numbers; and future ages will probably produce them. So long, therefore, as the person predicting avoided particulars, mentioning no dates, nor individual actions, there would be a strong probability, that in a series of years greater or less, some chief, or philosopher would arise, who might be said to be the object of the prediction. But should a character of a very extraordinary kind be ushered into the world four hundred years hence; a character in whom were combined seemingly discordant qualities, a present minute description of such a character could not be given, without the inspiration of God.

The truth of this will appear the more evidently in proportion to the minuteness of the description.

We proceed to observe, that in a great variety of passages in the Jewish prophetic writings, mention is made of an uncommon personage: Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment; and a man shall be as a hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb shall sing. Behold my servant whom I have chosen, mine elect, in whom my soul is delighted. I have put my spirit upon him, and he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, neither cause his voice to be heard in the street; a bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench. He shall not fail, nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth; and the isles shall wail for his law. Who is he that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? This, that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? Similar quotations might be multiplied almost to any amount.

It can scarcely escape your notice, not only that the language here used, is remarkable, but that the qualities attributed to the person in view, are extremely different, and apparently opposite. At one time he is mentioned as a tender and cautious instructor, sedulously avoiding whatever might discourage his pupils; at another time, as a vigorous, successful warrior, with weapons, and even with raiment dyed in blood. He is neither to strive nor cry, nor cause his voice to be heard in the streets. Yet is he to be "a king, whom God shall establish on his holy hill of Zion; he will break his enemies with a rod of iron, and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel." It would be strange indeed, that a false prophet, desirous that his predictions might obtain credit, should studiously construct them in such manner as to render it morally certain, that they would answer to no

future event; and it would be more astonishing still, if these predictions should, notwithstanding, receive a minute completion.

You would, perhaps, endeavor to avoid part of this difficulty, by supposing, that the discordancy arises from the number of those who arrogate to themselves prophetic powers. Each one, you suppose, would think it sufficient to be consistent with himself, having no interest in the reputation of others.

This answer rests entirely on a mistake, which small attention will rectify. It is not true that seeming discordancy arises from the number of those who are engaged in the description; the same prophet describes the Messiah as possessing these different qualities. The same Isaiah who in one chapter speaks of Messiah, as a man of sorrow and acquainted with grief, uses, in another part of his prophecy, the following language: His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the Father of the everlasting age, the Prince of peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever.

Had Isaiah been a false prophet, and inclined to impose on men by predicting the future appearance of an eminent character it would evidently have been prudent to feign a character, the existence of which would not be incredible. By this, two advantages would have been gained, i. e. present credit, and the probability that in some future personage the prediction might receive an apparent completion.

But if there is too much inconsistency in the predictions of Isaiah, to have come from a false prophet, the conclusion may appear to you still stronger, that they could not have proceeded from a true one.

This conclusion would be perfectly just, if the apparent inconsistency were real. If those seemingly discordant qualities, of which the prophet speaks were not actually united in the person of Jesus Christ, these predictions are not to be admitted as proof of the divine mission, either of Isaiah, or the Saviour.

But if these qualities have been united in Jesus of Nazareth, the previous improbability that they would be found combined in any individual, is undeniably a strong proof of their divine origin.

Though it is my design to mention a small part only of the prophecies which are deemed relative to Messiah, there is one too remarkably clear and copious, to be omitted. I mean that which is contained in the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. This chapter, together with the last three verses of the preceding, relates wholly to one subject, viz. the Messiah. No foreign matter is admitted.

The common rendering of this prophecy does not materially differ from the celebrated translation of bishop Lowth. What variation there is, will serve rather to render its application to our Saviour the more striking.

We begin with the second verse: He shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground.

The family, which gave birth to our Saviour according to the flesh had been illustrious, but was depressed at the time to which reference is here made. This appears from the circumstances in which Christ was born, from the occupation of his reputed father, and from the cheap sacrifice which was offered at the purification of the virgin Mary.

He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. To any one reading the whole chapter for the first time, it would readily occur, I think, that this language was not designed to convey an unfavorable opinion of the person to whom it relates. The impression would be that he should meet a reception no way corresponding with his real character. What kind of expectations the Jews had concerning Messiah, you well know. They were looking for talents and perhaps integrity; but these were to be united with temporal power, splendor and conquest. Proud of their standing in the church of God, they not only hated, but despised the nation to whom they were in bondage. From Messiah they expected relief, liberty and elevation.

What form, what comeliness, what beauty could they see in the reputed son of Joseph, that he should be desired? But they were not only disappointed in perceiving in Jesus the absence of qualities which they desired; but equally disappointed in perceiving the existence of others which they did not desire. They found plainness in detecting their characters and reproving their crimes. They heard themselves compared to fruitless trees incumbering a rich and cultivated soil. They heard it announced that the kingdom of God should be taken from them and given to another nation.

It follows immediately: He is despised and rejected of men ; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

How well did the condition of our Saviour correspond with this description? By a few obscure persons, his high character was acknowledged. But even by this class in general, he was malignantly persecuted. An inconstant, misguided populace were present sometimes, indeed, to wonder and applaud, but usually to cavil, accuse, or condemn. This numerous body in the Jewish community were always at the command of their better informed, but no less corrupt superiors. The ministers of the Mosaic religion were at this time sincerely hostile to the spirit of that religion, which it was their duty to teach. As the Mosaic establishment contributed to their ease, influence, and honor, it was an object of their warmest attachment, and by means of wrong interpretations they had been successful in hiding its spirituality both from their own view and the inspection of their disciples. On this formidable body of men, and their false system of religion the prophet of Galilee made an undisguised attack. He spared neither the vices, nor the false doctrine of the priesthood. Neither among the various religious sects, then existing, did he court the favor of any. Reproving all with impartiality, he was the object of their united resentment. Viewing him as a common enemy, they forgot their mutual discords to oppose him. By those who were elevated