self. And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.”*

There is, in the book of Jeremiah,† a passage concerning the purchase of a field for "seventeen shekels of silver" but it has no correspondence with the circumstances related by Matthew, and could not have been designed as a reference to Judas, any more than to Benedict Arnold. It is simply a record of some circumstances which transpired in the days when the author of the book called Jeremiah was living. It says nothing about treachery, such as characterized the betrayer of Jesus, or unfair dealing of any kind. It is merely a plain account of a regular business transaction-the purchase of certain lands which are specified. Take the Bible, at your leisure, and satisfy yourselves on this point. There is nothing, therefore, in the book of Jeremiah, as it now stands in our version, that has any relation whatever to the incidents stated by Matthew.

In the book of Zechariah,‡ there is something said

* Matt. xxvii. 3-10. † Jer. xxxii. 6—15. ‡ Zech. xi. 12, 13.

concerning thirty pieces of silver being paid to a potter; but it is ludicrous in the extreme to apply it to Judas, as an original prophecy concerning him; for the context shows that it related to something entirely different from the betrayal of Christ. It was not a prophecy-a prediction of something to come-but an account of a business affair that had already taken place. There is no agreement between the concomitant circumstances of the two cases. The purchase mentioned in Zechariah was perfectly fair, and was approved of the Lord; whereas the act of Judas was an act of extreme perfidy and baseness, for which he bitterly repented.

Besides, the passage wherein occur the phrases "potter" and "thirty pieces of silver," is in Zechariah; while Matthew refers to Jeremiah. "Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet," &c. It was stated, however, by William Whiston, a celebrated English divine and mathematician, born in 1667, that the passage in Zechariah, which we are now considering, was inserted in Jeremiah, in the versions of the Bible which were in circulation in the first century.*

The last passage cited by Matthew, as being prophetic, is the following. "And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled

*The distinguished individual referred to was familiarly styled "Honest Will Whiston," because of his unswerving integrity. He was willing to sacrifice ease, worldly honors and a lucrative situation, for the sake of principle. In 1703, he was appointed to succeed Sir Isaac Newton, as Professor of Mathematics, in the University of Cambridge, Eug.; but in 1710, having rejected the Trinity and embraced Unitarianism, he was expelled from the office of Professor and Catechetical Lecturer, and finally prosecuted as a heretic. He was a profound scholar and one of the ex cellent of the earth.

which was spoken by the prophet; They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots."* This is from the Psalms,† and is attributed to David. It is not prospective, but is in the present tense; and is merely a desponding ejaculation of the king of Israel, while in a depressed condition of mind, and having sole reference to himself.

We have now examined the principal passages from the Old Testament, supposed by many to be prophetic in their character, which are in some instances quoted, and in others merely alluded to, in the Gospel of Matthew. The three other Gospels contain citations and allusions of a similar nature-many of them, indeed, being only repetitions of those already noticed.

I think it has been shown conclusively that the quotations we have thus far critically analyzed, were not originally intended as prophecies of the events to which they are descriptively applied. Now what positive conclusion shall we adopt, respecting the design of their citation? Shall we say that the Evangelists and others who quoted them were entirely mistaken? Or shall we conclude that the passages were employed merely in an accommodated manner, as various proverbs and brief, pithy maxims are often used now, concerning events an1 persons whom the original authors never had in view, but whose characteristics correspond more or less with the proverbial description? This latter supposition is

* Matt. xxvii. 35. † Ps. xxii. 18.

the opinion of several learned men, in regard to many of the Old Testament quotations found in the Evangelical writings, though it should be remembered in justice to them, that they nevertheless believed Christ to have been distinctly foretold in some instances. Of this class of critics may be mentioned the justly renowned Methodist, Dr. ADAM CLARKE, from whom I have already presented one or two quotations; THOMAS HARTWELL HORNE, author of an "Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Scriptures," which is held in the highest repute by Protestants of all denominations; and Dr. GEO. CAMPBELL, author of an English translation of the Four Gospels, with Preliminary Dissertations, and Notes.

From the first-named of these distinguished critics, I have already presented brief illustrative extracts. Let me adduce a passage from each of the two latter:

"It was a familiar idiom of the Jews, when quoting the writings of the Old Testament, to say, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by such and such a prophet; not intending to be understood that such a particular passage, in one of the sacred books, was ever designed to be a real prediction of what they were then relating; but signifying only that the words of the Old Testament might be properly adapted to express their meaning, and illustrate their ideas. And thus the apostles, who were Jews by birth, and spoke and wrote in the Jewish idiom, have very frequently alluded to the sacred books, after the customary style of their nation ; intending no more by this mode of speaking than that

the words of such an ancient writer are happily descriptive of what was transacted in their time, and might, with equal propriety, be adapted to characterize such a particular circumstance as happened in their days."*

In speaking of the true meaning of the Greek term translated "fulfil," in several instances in the New Testament, Dr. CAMPBELL says it "is more properly expressed by the English word verify, than by fulfil. Those things are said to be fulfilled, which are no predictions of the future, but mere affirmations concerning the present, or the past. Thus, ch. ii. 15, [of Matthew] a declaration from the prophet Hosea, xi. 1, which God made in relation to the people of Israel, whom he had long before recalled from Egypt, is applied by the historian allusively to Jesus Christ, where all that is meant is, that, with equal truth, or rather with much greater energy of signification, God might now say, 'I have recalled my Son out of Egypt.' Indeed, the import of the Greek phrase, as commonly used by the sacred writers, is no more, as Le Clerc has justly observed, than that such words of any of the prophets may be applied with truth to such an event,—for it is even used, where that which is said to be fulfilled is not a prophecy, but a command, and where the event spoken of was not obedience to the command, (though the term is sometimes used in this sense also) but an event similar to the thing required; and which, if I may so express myself, tallies with the *HORNE'S Introduction, Part I, chap. ix. § 3.