the Scriptures, as the "true words of the Holy Ghost," our feet rest upon a rock. We know where we stand, and feel that we have a firm support. But breaking away from these, and regarding them no longer as a perfect standard, we are afloat together on an ocean of speculation and conjecture, without anything on which to depend for guidance and safety. Till the questions now at issue respecting the Bible are fairly settled, it is obviously of little importance to discuss any other questions, at least where an appeal to the divine word is necessary. For in the language of your reviewer, "Why should we be at the trouble of quoting and interpreting proof-texts, if, after the meaning is ascertained, there is still another question to be decided at the bar of reason, viz. Is this meaning true, or false ? ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE LATE GOV. SULLIVAN AND DR. SAMUEL WEST, ON ISAIAH VII. 14, AND MATT. I. 22, 23. LETTER OF GOV. SULLIVAN. Groton, 17th Nov. 1781. DEAR AND Rev. Sir, Having an inexpressible pleasure in cultivating an acquaintance with you, and no opportunity offering to be where you are, I take the freedom of intruding this letter upon you, not doubting but that the goodness of your heart, and the deep literature of your mind, will furnish me with an answer sufficient to remove any doubts I may labor under. I should not expect a satisfactory solution of the following case from a divine who teaches the Christian religion, because it is the religion of his country or family; but from one who builds upon first principles, I may hope for light and information.-But to the point. I have lately blundered upon a question in revealed religion. I find in the first chapter of Matthew, where the Evangelist is describing the advent of our Saviour, this text-"Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son," &c. The prophecy here referred to is in the seventh chapter of Isaiah, where, by the history of the transaction therein mentioned, two kings came up against Judah in the days of Ahaz, and about 750 years before Christ, and the prophet was directed to tell Ahaz to be quiet, and not to fear, for they should not prevail; and a sign was given, "A virgin shall conceive and bear a son; butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to choose the good and refuse the evil. For before the child shall know to choose the good and refuse the evil, the land which thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings."-The child here predicted was to be born in the days of Ahaz, and before the captivity of the ten tribes by the Assyrian monarch, as is agreed by Grotius, Hammond, Le Clerc, and others: And if this was not the case, how could the birth of the child be a sign of the truth of the prophecy? And if it was, how can the Evangelist's saying that the prophet spake of Jesus be reconciled with truth? An anonymous writer says that the prophet, in the sixteenth verse, left speaking of the child predicted, and turned his attention to the Messiah. But the particle for appears to me an insuperable bar in the way of this hypothesis; for in this light, instead of affording a reason in support of the prophecy, or serving to urge the truth of it, it will be but an unmeaning and useless part of the text. Le Clerc and some others solve the difficulty for themselves, in supposing that the Greek word rendered fulfilled, does not always mean the fulfilment of predictions of future events, but barely expresses an accommodation of borrowed words. If this is true, the prophet did not in this place prophesy of the Messiah at all; and if the observation has force, it applies to many other quotations of the apostles, and will have a great tendency to weaken the evidence of revealed religion. But some suppose that the prophecy is fulfilled in a secondary, typical, or allegorical sense, in Jesus; and why may not the prophecies apply to everybody and everything else as well, in an allegorical and typical sense? And if they have applied to two several persons already, why may we not expect a third? Whiston, aware of this difficulty, condemns all allegorical meaning, and wishes to restore the whole Hebrew Bible to its primitive purity, and avers that the Jews in the third century put a false copy into the hands of Origen to deceive the Christians. But this seems to be agreeing that the present copy does not amount to evidence sufficient to evince the truth of the Christian religion. And besides, how does Whiston know that there was a better copy 1700 years ago? Surenhusius, the Hebrew professor at Amsterdam, talks learnedly of points used by the ancient Jewish doctors in reading and construing Hebrew, and gives many instances of license taken by the apostles in shifting Hebrew points and letters in their quot ations. But why did not the apostles use the ancient points and letters? or is it probable that they would make such shiftings as to turn the meaning of the text from one person to another? Upon the whole, this learned conjecture serves only to resolve the difficulty into a multiplicity of errors. I do not expect to have every part of revealed religion opened to my capacity, but sincerely wish to have it cleared of every palpable contradiction. The Christian religion spreads so many moral beauties before my sight, that I am exceedingly unhappy when my mind labors in the evidence of it. And therefore from your learning and friendship, I hope to be taught, either that an inspired penman can, consistently with divine inspiration, be mistaken, or that there is no mistake in the quotation, by Matthew. If this point has been long settled, as perhaps you will tell me it has, you will forgive this intrusion, remembering that I only ask for the milk provided for babes. I am, Sir, with most cordial friendship, Rev. Mr. West. JAMES SULLIVAN. DEAR SIR, REPLY OF DR. WEST. Dartmouth, Dec. 9, 1781. I received last night your favor of the 17th ult., which gave me inexpressible satisfaction, as it revived in my mind those happy days when I had the pleasure of your company and conversation; besides it was a convincing proof of your sincere and affectionate regards for me. Permit me, Sir, further to assure you, that I am extremely pleased with the subject of your letter, and I heartily wish that every gentleman of my acquaintance would discover as earnest a desire as you have done to attain a rational conviction of the truth of revealed religion. Were this the case, bigotry and infidelity would be no more. They would vanish away, like the shades of night before the rising sun. Most cheerfully, then, will I now endeavour to solve the difficulties which you have proposed. I am fully convinced in my own mind that the passage in Isaiah vii. 14. is a real prediction of the miraculous conception of our Saviour; and that Matthew, in his first chapter, has applied this text in its true and literal sense, and not merely by way of accommodation. My reasons for it are these,First, both the ancient Greek translations of the Seventy, (which I have by me) and the Chaldee paraphrase (as I find by Pool's Synopsis) translate the words as we do, viz. "Behold a virgin shall conceive," &c.-Now as both these translations of the Seventy and the Chaldee paraphrase were made before the birth of our Saviour, and consequently before the sense of the text came to be controverted, they are a plain proof, that these ancient Jewish interpreters understood the text in the sense that Christians now do, viz. that a virgin should, in a supernatural way, conceive and bring forth a son. And we must naturally suppose that these ancient interpreters understood the true meaning of Hebrew words much better than we do at this day: therefore, they are unexceptionable witnesses in favor of the Christian sense of this text. And, indeed, it is hardly possible to make a tolerable sense of it upon the modern Jewish interpretation, which is, "Behold a young woman shall conceive and bear a son. Now let us remember, that the occasion of these words was this-God had offered to grant Ahaz any sign he should desire, to remove his fears concerning the confederate kings. Upon his refusing to ask a sign, God says, 'Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign; and what is it? Why, according to the interpretation I am now considering, it is this, A young woman some time or other, no mortal can tell when, shall in the usual manner conceive and bear a son.' And what notable thing shall this son do? Why, he shall eat butter, and honey, as other children are wont to do, until he is grown big enough to know good from evil!' This interpretation is so low and flat, that if I thought it to be the meaning of the prophet, I should be tempted to call in question, not only his inspiration, but also his good sense. Secondly, The Hebrew word which we translate virgin, seems to me incapable of being applied to any person, but a woman that had not known man; for the word properly signifies a hidden or concealed female, which evidently implies, as I understand it, one that had been hidden or concealed from the knowledge of man. The only places where this Hebrew word is used in Scripture are Gen. xxiv. 43. Exod. iv. 8. Ps. lxviii. 25. Prov. xxx. 19. Cant. iii. 1. Chap. vi. 8. Isaiah vii. 14., which last is the text under consideration. I presume, Sir, if you examine these texts in the English translation, you will conclude they all speak of virgins. If, then, this Hebrew word is translated a virgin by the ancients, who lived before the birth of our Saviour, if it is everywhere so used in the Hebrew Bible, and if the etymology of the word requires us to understand it in this sense, we may most certainly conclude, that the text under consideration is a prophecy of the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ. But you will ask, How could the prediction of this future event be considered as a sign, that the Jews should not be destroyed by the confederate kings? I answer, the word which we translate sign, is used in Scripture, sometimes to signify the absolute and unconditional promises and threatenings of the Deity, in contradistinction to those promises and threatenings in which a condition is implied. A few words will make this point very plain and easy. In Jeremiah, eighteenth chapter, we are told, that when the Deity threatens to destroy a nation, if they repent of their evil deeds, he will not bring upon them the destruction with which he had threatened them; in like manner, when he promises to build up a people, if they become disobedient, he will not confer upon them the blessing which he had promised. Thus, we find Jonah declaring to the Ninevites, "Yet in forty days and Nineveh shall be destroyed;" but upon their repentance we find the sentence was revoked. Thus also God had promised to David, that his house and kingdom should be established before him forever; but when David had been guilty of adultery and murder, he judged he had forfeited his right to the divine promise. See Ps. li. 4. "Against thee, thee only have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight, that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest;" that is, having committed this heinous crime against God, he was ready to acknowledge, that God was just in promising that he would establish his house forever, and that he would be clear from injustice, though he should never perform his promise to him, but should judge him according to his deserts. Thus much concerning promises and threatenings that are conditional. There are others that are absolute and unconditional. These latter are called signs. In proof of this, we may observe, that when God told Moses, that he was about to send him to Pharaoh, to deliver the children of Israel from their bondage, Moses immediately feels his own imperfection, and inability to undertake such an arduous task, and says, "Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?" To this the Deity replies, "Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee, when thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain." The Hebrew word translated token is the same with that which we render by the English word sign, in Isaiah vii. 14. Here we see that the Israelites' worshipping God upon mount Horeb, is made a sign, that God had sent Moses to deliver them from the Egyptian bondage; and yet this sign could not take place until the Israelites' deliverance from the Egyptians was completed. But it is called a sign, to assure Moses that the event should certainly take place, and that it should not fail through his insufficiency or misconduct; for God would be with him, and enable him to perform this arduous undertaking. In the same sense the word sign is used, 1 Sam. ii. 34. and also, 2 Kings, xix. 29. In like manner, the promise in the text, that a virgin should conceive and bear a son, is a sign, because it was an absolute and unconditional promise, which could not fail of its accomplishment, through the wickedness or misconduct of the Jewish nation. And it must afford great consolation to the pious Jews in the hour of distress; for it was to them a sign, or an infallible proof, that these confederate kings could not destroy them, because they must remain a distinct people until this glorious person should be born of a virgin. Before I proceed any further, I would rectify an error or two in our English translation of the passage before us. For instance, I would read the fifteenth verse thus, "Butter and honey shall he eat, until he know to refuse the evil and choose the good." Mr. Pool informs us that divers learned men so interpret it, and among others, the ancient Chaldee paraphrase. The Seventy |