which I draw from this is, that our Lord Christ, in his human nature, returning to this earth in like manner as he quitted it from Mount Olivet, will confound his adversaries, perfect his elect, restore his dispersed nation, still beloved for the fathers' sake, and establish his kingdom in righte

ousness.

To others, this will appear an unwarrantable conclusion; and they will consider the prophecies referred to satisfactorily fulfilled, if the great consummation be brought about after a spiritual manner; seeing that the seed of the woman, by his obedience unto death, hath procured and sent the Holy Ghost to this work; and that consequently, all that is done directly by the Spirit, may be said to be done by the Saviour, in his human nature.

But according to this view, a most unwarrantable liberty is taken with our text: it makes the first clause of this passage to be literally fulfilled; the king to be literally of the stock of David, (for the literal incarnation is not denied,) and it makes the fourth and fifth clauses of the same passage to be spiritually fulfilled; the king not literally executing judgment and justice in the earth, after a visible manner, so as to overwhelm gainsayers, and vindicate his friends in the eyes of the world; but spiritually establishing righteousness in the hearts of his people. Is this distinction authorized or warranted by the prophecy itself? or is it introduced, in order to accommodate the pro

phecy to the supposed interpretation? We reject it, and maintain consistently, that the reign of the seed of David, will be as literal as his incarnation. The angel Gabriel said to the virgin Mary, 1. thou shalt bring forth a son; 2. the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David. Here were two prophecies. Had Mary applied to the former the canon of interpretation, now commonly applied to the latter, she could not have believed, that she was literally to bear a son. If we would apply to the latter the canon of interpretation which history has shown to belong to the former, we could not deny the personal, literal reign of Jesus Christ, over the twelve tribes of Israel in Jerusalem. The only objection which can be urged against this is unbelief. Thus saith the Lord God concerning Mary, " Blessed is she that believed; for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord."

2. Let us inquire concerning the appearance of the king's person in that day. On this point it seems to me, that the history of the transfiguration of Jesus on Mount Tabor, was intended to instruct us; that transfiguration being, as I think, a specimen and earnest of the glorious appearance of our Lord the King in his kingdom. It was a prophecy by a fact. God reveals his purposes in two ways there are prophecies in words, and prophecies by facts. When God said, by his servant Daniel, "Messiah shall be cut off, but not for him

self;" there was a prophecy in words, of the vicarious death of the Lord Jesus. When the Jewish people "took every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house. . . . a lamb without blemish and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel killed it in the evening, and they took of the blood, and struck it on the two side-posts, and on the upper doorpost of the houses," there was a prophecy by a fact, of the same vicarious death. Compare Exod. xii. 1-14, with 1 Cor. v. 7.

When David said, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption;" there was a prophecy in words, of the resurrection of Jesus Christ: (Acts ii. 24— 30:) when Jonah was enclosed in the whale, and the third day vomited forth again on the dry land, there was a prophecy by a fact, of the same resurrection. (Matt. xii. 39, 40.)

When the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of Jeremiah, said, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers. But this shall be the covenant. I

will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts," &c.- there was a prophecy in words, of the new covenant. When Sarah, the free-woman, bare a son to Abraham, against the course of nature, according to the promise, and

by the sovereign power of God, there was a prophecy by a fact, of the same new covenant. (Gal. iv. 22-31.)

So also, when Jesus said, "The Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels," he prophesied, in words, of his second advent in glory. And when he was transfigured before Peter, James, and John, on Mount Tabor, there was a prophecy by a fact, of the same glorious advent.

It was by a consideration of that glory, that Jesus had been impressing upon his disciples the importance of following him fully, and cheerfully suffering for his sake: "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life, shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." In order to give this exhortation full force upon them, he promises to some of them a specimen of this influential glory: "Verily, I say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." Accordingly, six days after, he was transfigured in the presence of three of them; and his face

did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. Thus they were supplied with some distinct idea of what the glory was to be, to the end that they might teach others, when the proper time should come for making it known. They were not to make it known until after his resurrection. Jesus charged them, saying, “Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of Man be risen again from the dead. This restriction was necessary: had his glory been proclaimed, it would have frustrated his gracious purpose of suffering: for had the rulers known him, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. It was necessary, however, that the earnest of his glorious appearance should be given, previous to his resurrection; because, the object of his appearing, subsequent to his resurrection, being that he might be identified, and the literal resurrection of his flesh established beyond a doubt; it was of course necessary, that his body should then appear, not in a glory to which they were strangers, but as it had done in ordinary, before his death. At the time appointed, his disciples declared the glorious vision, and the language of St. Peter, in so doing, fully justifies the exposition of the event here given. (See 2 Pet. i. 16, 17, 18; and compare Matt. xvi. 24-28, and xvii. 1-10.)

The appearance of the Lord Jesus, therefore, the King of the Jews, when he shall return to this earth, and execute justice and judgment in the