not more plausible than just, and a mere modern innovation on the generally received and supposed orthodox method of interpretation.

In this respect it appears of moment to inquire into the opinions and the system of interpretation maintained at different periods by the Church of God, and to notice also the circumstances which have at any time tended materially to warp or prejudice its judgment. For the voice of the mystical members of Christ's body is surely the voice of "the Spirit and the Bride;" and that voice will not therefore pass unheeded by those who desire to understand the voice of God himself. And it is the more needful to insist on this point, seeing that men have at all times been disposed to disparage the voice of the Church, when its sound has happened to be in opposition to their own opinions; and instead of showing a becoming diffidence of going counter to that voice, except for weighty and constraining reasons, have betrayed an utter recklessness of it altogether, as if our pious forefathers had been given up to follow cunningly-devised fables. The opinions of the orthodox Jewish writers have been in this manner cast aside, and confounded with the rubbish of anti-christian rabbins; as if, because a man were an Israelite, he could not possibly have been guided into the truth of God, and the Church before Christ had been absolutely without direction from above. The sentiments of the primitive fathers of the Christian Church have been in like manner at once discarded, whenever they have seemed to contradict more modern theories. And, in the present day, there is a growing disposition to treat the views maintained by the fathers of the Reformation-views which in some particulars have been substantially coincided in by the whole protestant body, as the result of ingenious prejudice and antipathy against their papal enemies.

First, for the sake of perspicuity, the subject of inquiry may be divided into seven different periods; the first comprehending the voice of the Jewish Church; the second, from the time of the Apostles to Constantine, embracing the history of the purest period of the Christian Church; the third from Constantine to Jerome, and that period of twilight, or neither light nor darkness, which preceded the passing of the Church into the night of popery; the fourth, what are usually called the dark ages: viz. from Justinian to the Reformation; the fifth, the first century of the Reformation; the sixth and seventh, the two centuries after the Reformation, which brings us down into our own times.

1. The Jewish testimony up to the time of Christ is but scanty, as regards any point, if we except the writers of the

Old Testament; to quote whom would be considered a begging the question; since our object is rather to bring forward the expositions of uninspired writers, to prove the correctness of the view which has already been taken of passages quoted from the Scriptures. Little, however, as we have on this point, it is quite enough to sanction the interpretation here given.

The first is from the Targums.** The Babylonian Targum on Gen. xlix. 10 says: "Christ shall come, whose is the kingdom, and him shall the nations serve.' How this was understood by the Church will further appear presently. The Jerusalem Targum on the same Scripture says: "The king Christ shall come, whose is the kingdom, and all nations shall be subject unto him."

Rabbi Eliezer, the great, is supposed to have lived just after the second temple was built. He, referring to Hosea's prophecy, (Chap. xiv. 8.) applies it to the pious Jews who seemed likely to die without seeing the glory of Israel, saying: "As I live, saith Jehovah, I will raise you up, in the time to come, in the resurrection of the dead; and I will gather you with all Israel. "t

The Sadducees are related to have asked Rabbi Gamaliel, the preceptor of St. Paul, whence he would prove that God would raise the dead. Nor could he silence them till he brought against them Deut. xi. 21, "Which land the Lord sware that he would give to your fathers." The Rabbi argued, that as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had it not, and God cannot lie, therefore they must be raised from the dead to inherit it.

The period in which the writer of the Book of Wisdom lived is doubtful; but certainly he must have been a Jew of high antiquity. § In chap. ii. 7, 8, he says of the dead, "In the time of their visitation they shall shine, and run to and fro like sparks among the stubble: they shall judge the nations, and

*The Targums were paraphrases of the law, supposed to have been first used in Ezra's time; (See Nehemiah viii. 7-9.) but there is no authentic written paraphrase or Targum before the time of Onkelos and Jonathan, who are supposed to have lived about thirty years before Christ. Writers indeed differ about the antiquity of the Targums, some making them later, and some earlier. The Jerusalem Targum is supposed to be a fragment of a much more ancient paraphrase. These Targums may be seen in Buxtorf's Hebrew Bible. Basil xvi. 10.

+ See his Capitula, chap. xxxiv.

+ Rabbi Simai, though of later date, argues the same from Exodus vi. 4, insisting that 'the law asserts in this place the resurrection from the dead-to wit, when it is said; And also I have established my covenant with them, to give them Canaan, &c. for (he adds) it is not said to you, but to them.' He only, however, follows herein the earlier commentators. See this whole testimony in Mede's Works, Book iv. Ep. 43. Also the Gemara Sanhedrim, cap. ii. § Grotius supposes him to have lived between the time of Ezra and Simon the Just.

have dominion over the peoples, (Vulg.) and their Lord shall reign for ever." But whosoever this writer was, he likewise only gives the current opinion of expositors of his own age.

*

The sentiments of the writer of the book of Tobit are to the same purport. After describing the first captivity, and the return from it, together with the rebuilding of the temple, he says: "Then shall they again go forth into a captivity, by far the greatest they ever were in. But the blessed and holy God shall remember them, and gather them from the four quarters of the world. Then shall Jerusalem, the holy city, be restored with a beautiful and excellent structure, as also the temple shall be built with a famous structure, which shall not be destroyed nor demolished for ever, as the prophets have said. Then shall the Gentiles be converted to worship the Lord, &c. The horn also of his people shall be exalted before all nations, and the seed of Israel shall celebrate and glorify his great name."t However some passages in this book may prove, that it is not entitled to be admitted into the inspired canon; it nevertheless shows what were the religious sentiments prevalent at a very remote period of antiquity. Good critics (as Dr. Gray) have contended, that it was written in Chaldaic during, or soon after, the first captivity, and the early chapters even prior to that time.

Besides the foregoing statements, which are mostly advanced as the direct exposition of scripture texts, there are likewise various traditions of the early Jewish church, which are entitled to attention from the general respect shown to them in all ages: though they cannot be urged in the light of direct testimony. Among these is the commonly received opinion, that the world was to last, in its present state, during 6000 years; and that in the seventh millennary it was to be renewed, and all the promises of God made to the fathers accomplished at that time. This tradition, however, does not appear to rest upon any foundation, derived from the word of God, that is of a character sufficiently evident to satisfy a rigid inquirer; whilst yet it is remarkable how very generally it has been entertained, by the Jews, the primitive fathers, and the reformers. They seem to have deduced it chiefly in an analogical way from the fact of God's having created the world in six days, and appointing the seventh for a sabbath; and also from the appointment of the sabbatical and jubilean years. But no direct testimony of scripture is brought for it (that I am aware of),

* See Mede to Meddus, Book iv. Ep. 20.

+ See chap. xiv. according to the ancient Constantinopolitan copy, written originally in Chaldee, and published by Paulus Fagius. The corruption of the ordinary Greek and Latin copies will be noticed presently.

nearer to the mark than Isaiah ii. 11, advanced by Rabbi Ketina, from more ancient authority: "And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that DAY."* Nevertheless, so generally was it believed, that, immediately after the destruction of the temple by Titus, when the Christians urged upon the Jews that Messiah must certainly have appeared, since the sceptre had now passed away, and the oblation and sacrifice were ceased, the latter deemed it quite sufficient in reply, to point to the fact, that the world was not yet 6000 years old. It was not, however, agreed among them in which of the seven millennaries of the world, Messiah would come. Some thought it would be the beginning of the fifth, some of the seventh, and some the latter end of the sixth.‡ But the most general one was, that the world was to be 2000 years void of the law, 2000 under the law, and 2000 under Messiah; which opinion was again pressed on them by the christians to prove, that in this case Messiah must be, by their own showing, already come. § This latter opinion is called, by the Jews, "a tradition of the house of Elias," an eminent Rabbi, who lived before the birth of Christ. The same also taught, that in the seventh millennary the earth would be renewed, and the righteous dead raised; that these should not again be turned to dust, and that the just, then alive, should mount up with wings as the eagle; so that in that day they would not need to fear, though the mountains (quoting Psalm xlvi. 3.) should be cast into the midst of the sea. ||

Now these traditions, though, as before observed, they are not sufficient for direct testimony, as to the view of the Jewish Church, respecting the covenant of promise; are, nevertheless, of use, as indicating indirectly what the general voice and expectation of the Church was, without which these traditions could not have been so generally received.

To return, however, to the former testimonies; whatever blindness might have happened to Israel, at the time of their casting off, surely the Church was not blinded throughout the whole period, from the return from Babylon to the first advent of Messiah! This were as greatly to undervalue the voice of the Church, as the Papists are wont to overrate it: and it would be difficult to say on what ground the voice of the Church, at any period, unless confirmed by miracles, ought to be entitled

* See the Talmud, under the head Rosch Haschana.

+ See Pezron's Antiq. ch. iv. 37.

See these various opinions in Rabbi Asche.

§ See the Talmud, under head Shanedrim, and also Havodu Zara. I am chiefly indebted for the authorities in this matter to Bishop Clayton's inquiry, and Ramundus Martinus, to whom he also refers.

See this passage at large in Mede, book iv. 951.

to regard. One thing we may, at least, assume, that such interpretations of Scripture, as the Church in the time of our Lord and the apostles was wont to entertain, would be corrected or exploded; for it is quite irreconcileable with all reasonable notions to suppose, that our Lord would constantly observe his pious followers to speak and hope erroneously, on this or any other point, yet never disabuse them of their false conceits; the more especially as he did continually attack the false opinions of the Pharisees and Sadducees. We have, therefore, to inquire next into the views entertained by Christians on this head, in the age of the apostles, and in the two centuries immediately succeeding.

2. So far then, as the testimony of the christian fathers, from the time of the apostles down to the time of Origen, is concerned, we have ample proof, in such of their writings as have come down to us, that it is similar to that of the Jewish Church; only more explicit, as might be expected.

The first who may be noticed is Barnabas,* who in Abp. Wake's collection of the Apocryphal Epistles, speaks as if he were Barnabas the apostle. This is questionable; but there is no doubt that he was of very high antiquity, and that his epistle was read in the Churches at a very early period. These epistles, however, have been so corrupted in later times, that notwithstanding the purification they have undergone, through subsequent critics, it is necessary to receive with some caution the statements they contain. The passage, however, to which the appeal will now be made, is probably as free from serious objection, allowing for somewhat of obscurity in it, as any which the book contains. For, as will hereafter be shown, the sentiments of the fathers on the point in question were, at a later period, most industriously distorted and falsified.

Barnabas, then, has been speaking of the covenant with Abraham, as having superseded the Mosaic covenant; and he inquires whether God has fulfilled the covenant which he sware to the fathers. He then argues that it is so far fulfilled, that God has sent Christ, who is to be the covenant pledge for the remainder of it; quoting Isaiah xlii. 6: "I will give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the gentiles;" and Isaiah

* Dr. Hamilton of Strathblane, in a work of his against the students of Prophecy, has rashly stated that the principles of Millennarianism were opposed and rejected, by almost every father of the church, with the exception of Barnabas, Clement, &c. &c. Now the fact is, that the numerous fathers mentioned by the doctor, as exceptions to his rule, are almost the whole of those whose works have been preserved down to the time of Origen. The doctor may be safely challenged to adduce one single passage in any father, during that period, opposing or rejecting the view; the utmost that can be said of any is, that they do not mention the subject; when they do advert to it, they support and maintain the view that has here been given.