alent at this time in the oriental world, and especially in Judea. These surely are remarkable attestations; and the many instances of persons, who appeared in Judea about this time, pretending to be the Messiah, and collecting vast numbers of deluded Jews around them-facts repeatedly mentioned by the historians of that day-are additional proofs of this general persuasion.

If we turn now to the New Testament, we shall find this state of things corroborated there by many incidental circumstances. The state of the publick mind in Judea is indicated by the anxiety of Herod upon hearing of the birth of a remarkable child in Bethlehem, and by the visit of the eastern Magi. Still more illustrative is the thronging of the multitude to John upon his first appearance, and the message of the Pharisees and priests to inquire, if he were the Christ. “And all the people mused in their hearts," says the evangelist, "whether he were the Christ, or not." We discover the same eager expectation of the Messiah, as a prophet as well as prince, in the conversation of the Samaritan woman, who belonged, you will observe, to a different and hostile nation. Observe too how the people pressed around Jesus, demanding the sign from heaven which they expected of the Messiah; observe how they caught at every appearance of extraordinary power; how, after his performance of a miracle, they were ready to take him by force and make him a king; and with what acclamations and regal honours the multitude

accompanied him into Jerusalem. His humble condition and ignominious death alone restrained and extinguished their enthusiasm. In a word, every thing in profane history and in the evangelical narrative proves, that the minds of the men of that age were wrought to a high pitch of expectation, that the great prophet and king would soon come into the world.

2. But what was the source of this universal expectation at this moment? I answer, that I can discover or imagine nothing, except what these historians themselves assign as the authority, the oracles of the Jewish scriptures. This was the fulness of time for the advent of the Messiah, because it was the time predicted in prophecy. To the prophets Christ and his apostles repeatedly refer, and to me it appears, that if every other prediction of a Messiah in the Old Testament were allowed to be ambiguous, the single prophecy in the fifty third chapter of Isaiah would be sufficient to mark out the person we have acknowledged. It is too long to be quoted here, but it may safely be asserted that the description contained in it applies, in the most remarkable manner, to Jesus of Nazareth, and to no other person within our knowledge, who ever lived. It is the prophecy, which engaged the attention of the Ethiopian eunuch, and which Philip explained to him in the only manner in which it can be appropriated by any ingenuous man, who has read the history of Jesus of Nazareth. But you will inquire, perhaps, what prediction so accurately marks the time of the Messiah's advent, as to have

excited this extraordinary expectation at this precise period. I must acknowledge, that some of those passages which are commonly alleged, particularly the mention of Shiloh, in Genesis, and the desire of all nations, in Haggai, do not appear to me sufficiently indubitable in any interpretation, which they have hitherto received. There is however a remarkable passage in Daniel-the celebrated prophecy of the seventy weeks-which, if there were no other, appears to me sufficient to have authorized the general expectation we have mentioned. There is not a shadow of reason for yielding to the suggestions of Porphyry, that this book was written after the events it predicts, and that it is only an ambiguous history of the times of Antiochus. Our Saviour himself appeals to a part of it, in describing the desolation of Jerusalem. Therefore it certainly existed in his time, and was applied to approaching events. Let it be remembered too, that Porphyry does not pretend to dispute the existence of the book before the time of Christ, but quarrels with the application of its prophecies to him. In this celebrated prediction, then, it clearly appears, that in about five hundred years from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem, after the captivity, the Messiah should appear. From whatever date the reckoning is made, or whatever length is assigned to the years, the variations are not, upon any supposition, so great as to prevent our acknowledging that such a prophecy, wherever it was read, must have excited the expecta

tions, which we are sure prevailed, of the appearance of the Messiah about the very time that Jesus lived. If you add to these considerations, that more than one intimation is given in the prophets, that the Messiah should come while the second temple was standing, that it was well understood that he should be born of the family of David, and of the tribe of Judah, you will instantly perceive that he must have appeared, if at all, before the destruction of Jerusalem. For who does not know, that since that unparalleled desolation the Jews have been dispersed throughout the habitable globe, that they have not now the vestige of a temple, that their distinction of tribes is confounded, that their families and genealogies are utterly lost, and that it became and has remained, from the hour of this overthrow, utterly impossible to apply the distinctive marks of the Messiah to any future pretender? Christ, then, must have appeared at the period he did, or not at all; and in our controversy with the Jews this circumstance appears nearly decisive. It was the fulness of time, the consummation of prophecy, the closing period of the Jewish state.

3. In the third place the peculiar circumstances and character of the nation, when God sent forth his Son, render that period the fulness of time. Even from the time of Malachi, a period of several centuries, they had been favoured with no prophet, or authorized instructer. Their religion, which was introduced in the infancy of the world, only to answer God's design of exhibiting the providence, and preserving the

knowledge of one supreme Deity, in the midst of an idolatrous world, had now accomplished its purpose. About two centuries before Christ, the sacred books of the Jews had been translated into Greek, which might then be called the language of the civilized world. They were thus made accessible to all the readers and thinkers of that polished age; and the language of many of the heathen philosophers discovers, that they were not unacquainted with Moses. At this period, too, the Jews'under the favour of the successors of Alexander, had established themselves in every considerable city in the Roman empire. Their synagogues were every where tolerated, and they seem to have had proselytes all over the world. The world was indeed in such a situation, that the knowledge of any thing extraordinary in their fortunes would be instantly diffused.

The corruption of their manners and of their religion had, by this time, discovered the utter insufficiency of their economy, and demanded a thorough revolution. The traditions of the elders had completely nullified their law: it had lost all its moral, and retained only its ceremonial force; and an insane zeal for this narrow and superstitious religion had usurped, in their minds, the place of every virtue, human or divine. They were at once the most corrupt and bigoted of religionists, and God's mercy seemed to call for the abolition of this peculiarity, and the introduction of a more liberal and more spiritual dispensation. The common Jews were enslaved by a hierarchy, in