words. Thus, in the directions given about the manner of preparing the paschal lamb, it is said, Exod. 12: 46, "None of his bones shall be broken." This saying the evangelist, John 19: 36, finds verified in what happened to our Lord, when the legs of the criminals who were crucified with him were broken, and his were spared."*

Let me repeat, however, as a matter of simple justice to the names of those from whose writings the foregoing extracts are taken, that they reverently believed Christ to have been actually prophesied in some parts of the Old Testament which are quoted or referred to in the Gospels. While they regarded several such passages as used merely in the proverbial, accommodated manner, they at the same time considered some as exceptions to this rule, viewing them as original predictions concerning Jesus. I have found myself unable to arrive at this conclusion. Those portions of the Psalms and Prophetic books with which the character and career of Jesus in some respects correspond, are mostly in the present or a past tense; and in most cases the context shows beyond cavil that the language was uttered in relation to events that had no more to do with Christ than with Mahomet. With the most respectful and brotherly feeling towards those who differ from me in opinion on this point, let me say, that after a very careful and dispassionate examination of this whole subject, I have not found any thing which, to me, bears the sure impress of an original prophecy, having direct, intentional reference to Jesus

*Campbell's Notes on the Gospels, Note on Matthew, first chapter.

Christ. In my humble judgment, all the Old Testament passages cited or alluded to in the Gospels, Epistles, &c., may properly (as respects their original meaning, and their use in the New Testament) be placed in one and the same category.

I do not say that the New Testament writers have never in any instance quoted a passage from the Jewish Scriptures, verily supposing that it was an intended prophecy of Jesus. They may have been mistaken in regard to this, as they certainly were in relation to some other matters. But it seems reasonable to my mind, that they have in many cases (the majority, at least) quoted portions of the Old Testament merely as proverbs; in the same manner that we now quote and apply some wise adage that has been handed down from sire to son for many generations. For instance, if we see a man who is unstable in his business habits, fluctuating in his plans and purposes, never applying himself long and industriously to any one pursuit, and so being unthrifty, we say of him, perhaps, that he verifies or fulfils the old adage, "A rolling stone gathers no moss." Nobody, however, misunderstands us to say that such maxim was originally intended for him and him only. It may have been fulfilled a hundred times before he was born. Still, it suits his case just as well as if first spoken concerning him. How many pithy sayings of undying Shakspeare are in daily use, to "point a moral or adorn a tale," to excite healthful merriment, or to touch the heart with a kindling sensation of spiritual gladness. How many proverbial

sayings of the old bard, some of which may be considered as prophetic, are fulfilled, or verified, every day.

Should it, however, be shown, that some evangelist or apostle quoted an Old Testament prediction, honestly supposing it to be an intended prophecy of Jesus, even that would not be an indubitable proof that such were its primary meaning and intent: for, according to the records ascribed to them, they were sometimes grossly mistaken. They misunderstood the very nature of their Master's kingdom, supposing it was to be temporal, instead of spiritual. Would it, therefore, be altogether surprising if they should erroneously apply to it some portions of the Jewish Scriptures which related to matters entirely foreign ?

I believe that all the passages of the Old Testament which are cited in the New, are of a nature similar to those we have examined-involving the same philological principles, and to be interpreted by the same general rule. And it seems to me (though I admit, of course, that I may be mistaken) that any one else who will inspect the whole matter with eyes unfilmed by prejudice, will see it in the same light. Be it understood, however, that if any one should disagree with me, in this particular, I shall not, on that account, deem it warrantable to withhold from him the title of Christian, especially if he claims it!

Fanciful commentators and rhapsodical spiritualizers have imagined that Jesus was prophesied and foreshadowed in almost every book of the Old Testament. They

have verily thought they could discern types of Christ in Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and various other noted characters mentioned in the old Jewish books. And they have attempted to edify us by profound disquisitions on the subject, even demonstrating (to their own satisfaction, to say the least) that the spiritual affinity between Christ and the Church was meta phorically set forth in some of the sensual love-songs ascribed to king Solomon!

The oft-cited passage in Isaiah,* which Jesus is represented as having read in the synagogue, and applied to himself, was not by him exclusively appropriated to the subject of his own character and mission. The account ascribes no language to him which necessarily implies that he considered Isaiah's language as a prediction having express and sole reference to himself. He seems according to the account as it stands in our version, to have employed the words in the proverbial sense-in the way of accommodation to the circumstances of his own case. He merely said to the listeners, at the close of the reading, that the words he had rehearsed were on that day fulfilled (or verified) in their ears. He did not intimate that they were originally written concerning him. However, each one can judge for himself concerning what is and what is not implied by the account, which is as follows: "And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath-day, and stood

*Isa. ixi. 1, 2.

up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."*

Portions of the seventy-second Psalm are often quoted with reference to Jesus, as though the author had him expressly in view. And yet that Psalm is preceded by this title: "A Psalm for Solomon." It commences thus; "Give the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness unto the king's son." This was the language of David, praying for himself ("the king") and Solomon, his "son," who was to be his successor! Can any thing be plainer than this?

Some portions of the Psalm, I admit, may be applied, with metaphorical propriety, to Christ. They may be used as poetically descriptive of his progessive kingdom. Only in the way of accommodation, however, do I believe they can be rightfully thus employed. The authorship

* Luke, iv. 16—21,