had been so inclined, have restored the Mosaic constitution. But during that time the party of the Pharisees had gradually attained to influence, and had begun to strive after power. They were not a priestly sect; on the contrary, the great object of their ambition was to supplant the priesthood in their rights and their power. For this the Sanhedrin offered the surest means. As a tribunal it was placed above the priesthood, so that the attainment of the majority there necessarily put them in possession of the supreme power, both ecclesiastical and civil. Their selfish gratification was to them dearer than the interests of truth and the ordinances of Moses. To profit fully by their usurpation, it was necessary to persuade the multitude, who were zealous for the law, that this heathen tribunal was a Mosaic Institution. For this it was necessary to pervert the Divine commands, invent a fictitious history of the tribunal from the time of Moses, and to give currency to falsehood. The sentence of men guilty of such practices, who appear as despisers of the religion which they professed, flatterers of a power which they abhorred, and robbers of an authority belonging to others, can never be regarded as a testimony against the character of one who denounced their hypocrisy, and exposed their evil practices.*

*That they were guilty of abusing their power to promote fictitious traditions seems to be admitted by M. Salvador himself, in a note occurring vol. i., page 183, where he says,

"La

The sentence of the Sanhedrin is rather a testimony to the sincerity and zeal of the Lord Jesus Christ, and at least an indispensable requisite to establish the truth of his claims to the Messiahship.* No evidence could establish the claims of one, who had not been opposed and persecuted by such wicked men. A true prophet could not but oppose their principles and practice, and was therefore as sure to provoke their wrath as to arouse their jealousy. Persecution by such a body was a necessary testimony to the genuineness of prophetic claims, and this testimony Jesus of Nazareth pos

sesses.

secte des Sadducéens, dont je parlerai plus tard, et qui tenait à la doctrine primitive, s'opposa à l'abus qu'on fit alors des interpretations et des traditions, et voulut les rejeter entierement. Jesus-Christ lui même s'eleva avec force contre ces abus."

* With the attempt of M. Salvador to defend the conduct of the Sanhedrin in condemning our Lord, I have thought it unnecessary to meddle. It has been formally treated by M. Dupin, aîné, in a tract entitled, "Jesus devant Caiphe et Pilate," republished in the fourth volume of the Brussels edition of M. Salvador's "Histoire des Institutions de Moise." I have also treated the same subject in Sermon IV. of a volume entitled "Plain Sermons."

LECTURE II.

ISAIAH IX. 6.

"Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

THE prophecies relating to the Messiahship of the Lord Jesus Christ may be conveniently divided into three classes. First, Those of which we see the fulfilment with our own eyes. Secondly, Those, the fulfilment of which is recorded in the New Testament. And, thirdly, Those which have not yet been fulfilled, and which, therefore, in the Jewish mind, form a ground of objection, and a reason for unbelief: and in this order I propose to treat them, beginning with those which refer to the Messiah's Deity.

My first assertion is, that there are numerous prophecies announcing that Messiah should be acknowledged as the true God. My first fact, that Jesus of Nazareth has been and is acknowledged as such, and that of such acknowledgement there is no second example in the history of the world.

My conclusion, that the prophecies are true, and that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.

Our first business, then, is to produce the prophecies in question, and to show, that, according to their obvious grammatical meaning, they announce the acknowledgment of Messiah's Deity. But here we are met with a direct denial. It is asserted not only that such prophecies do not, but that they cannot exist. It is said that the doctrine of the union of Godhead and manhood in one person is impossible in the nature of things, and contrary to the fundamental doctrine and universal analogy of the Old Testament.* With respect to the former objection, I reply, that if the union of Godhead and manhood in one person be impossible, the impossibility must result from the fact that some attributes of Deity are incompatible with the attributes of humanity, and it is for those who make the objection to point out what they are, and to show the incompatibility. To say that finite and infinite cannot co-exist in one person is

* Quod vero sub idea hominis Deus adorandus proponatur: est Christiana doctrina: quippe adorare præcipit Deum incarnatum, hominem Deum, siquidem verbum caro factum est; eumque facit visibilem, mensurabilem, loco conclusum. Neque obstat distinctio in quantum Deus, et in quantum homo; quia hoc est quod impossibile putatur, et divinæ ideæ prorsus contrarium, scilicet quod Deus possit limitatam naturam induere salva ejus infinitate. Orobio in Amic. Collat., p. 110.

not sufficient, for we do not know what infinite is. The term expresses a bare negation. We use the word simply to express an unknown quantity, and, therefore, cannot by any à priori argumentations determine anything concerning it. If we apply it to extension, and say that God is omnipresent, that he fills all things, that he occupies immensity, we may ask, where, then, is the place of the creation? If the Deity be an infinite pleroma, how was it possible to make room for all created things?* And we may further ask, how can he who is infinite be wholly present in any given place which is finite? If he be only partially present, then is he composed of parts, and, therefore, not infinite. But if he be wholly present, then is infinity contained in finity. If we apply the term to duration, and say that God is eternal, then we have a similar difficulty; we may ask, how can eternity and time

* This difficulty has occupied the attention of the Cabbalists as well as others.

"Præ nimietate splendoris vehementissime coruscantis non poterat produci mundus, vel oriri aliud quid.

"Cum autem in mentem veniret extenso huic, quod vellet condere mundos, et emanando producere animantia, atque in lucem proferre perfectionem potentiarum suarum activarum, et nominum atque cognominum suorum, que erat caussa impulsiva creandi mundi, tum compressa quadantenus lux ista, a puncto quodam medio ad latera recessit, atque sic relictus est locus quidam vacuus, dictus spatium inane, æquidistans a puncto illo, exacte in medio ejus constituto."-Brücker. Hist. Crit. Philosoph. Per. ii., Part I., lib. ii., cap. iii., sect. 2, Tom. 2, p. 997.