that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." And throughout his writings, without making such elaborate statements, he so alludes to this as an acknowledged doctrine, as to prove that it was familiarly received and understood to be the basis of the Christian faith. He teaches the Colossians to be thankful to the Father, who had "delivered them from the powers of darkness, and translated them into the kingdom of his dear Son in whom they had redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." And to the Ephesians he writes, very remarkably, "You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."3 Such was the doctrine proposed both to Jews and Gentiles. But from what existing opinions, among either, was it derived? The Jews, we know, as a body, were entirely satisfied with themselves. That 1 Gal. iii. 22. 2 Col. i. 13. Eph. ii. 1. 4 Trypho the Jew says, in his dialogue with Justin, "Your precepts in the Gospel are so strong and extraordinary, that we conceive it impossible for any to observe them." Orobio says the same. D sect among them which had the most authority and influence, never seems to have doubted but that their scrupulous attention to the ceremonies and prescriptions of their law entitled them to the especial favour of God.1 Probably the general feelings of their party are accurately characterized by the Pharisee's prayer, in which their self-complacency is described to the life: "Lord, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers: I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess." It is impossible that men who supported those interpretations of the law which Jesus so forcibly confutes; men who eluded the obligations of filial duty by dedicating their money to the uses of the temple, and censured acts 1 So Orobio, in his conference with Limborch; and in the Answers to Questions proposed to the Jews, published by Brenius; "Spiritualis liberatio solum-modo dependet ab observatione legis quam Deus in Monte Sinai promulgavit." See Owen on Hebrews, i. 81. Turretin alleges it as one of the Jewish notions refuted by Jesus, "that all Jews would certainly be saved." He adduces a passage from the Codex Sanhedrim, which affirmed that "every Jew had a portion in the future world;" and another, from the Talmud, in which it is said that "Abraham is sitting near the gates of hell, and does not permit any Israelite, however wicked he may be, to descend into hell."-See Horne's Introd. v. iii. p. 73. "The Jews thought that no Israelite should be deprived of future happiness, whatsoever his faults had been, unless he were guilty of apostasy, idolatry, and a few other crimes, which they specified." Jortin, from Just. Mart. Dial. p. 443. Thirlby. "The school of Elias used to say, that whosoever learned the traditions of the Misnah might be assured he should have eternal life." -Id. Disc. on Christ. Relig. p. 28. 2 Luke xviii. 11. of mercy, because they interfered with the sanctity of the Sabbath-should be awake to those spiritual views of human obligation, and of the extent of the divine law, and of the submission of the heart required by true religion, which would enable them to discover the truth, that "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God;" or that those who "have done all," still have reason to call themselves unprofitable servants.”2 We may affirm this with more confidence, from the pains which St. Paul takes to establish the point in question on the consciences of the Roman Jews, when they had embraced Christianity. "Behold," he says, "thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and knowest his will, and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge, and of the truth n the law." In this he lays hold of the national prejudice; their self-complacency; their assumed superiority; their confidence of the divine favour. He knew it well; for he describes his own altered state of feelings, which led him to condemn himself, although he had before been, "touching the righteousness which is of the law, blameless."4 Indeed, nothing from the beginning had excited so much 1 Rom. iii. 23. 3 Rom. ii. 17. malignity against Jesus, as the little respect which he paid to the legal or formal righteousness on which the Pharisees depended, and the boldness with which he laid open the real corruption of their hearts, concealed as it was, even from themselves, by a thick veil of ignorance and error. The other prevailing party in the nation, the Sadducees, would be in no respect more likely to invent or receive these humiliating doctrines. Denying altogether the immortality of the soul, and the providence of God, not in the total absence of religious instruction, like the heathen, but in spite of a revelation which was generally received by their countrymen; it was not probable, that they should embrace the notion of a Moral Governor in controversy with them, or believe the danger of a resurrection to condemnation. These were the sceptical portion of the people; the free-livers and free-thinkers of their day. We can tell, from our own experience, what prospect there was of a doctrine proving acceptable to men of this sort, which began by impeaching them as offenders against a righteous and holy God, who looked on all iniquity with abhorrence. The two classes of men whom it is most difficult to bring over to a right acknowledgment of the Christian faith, are those who, like the Romanists at the period of the Reformation, have rigidly, but too exclusively, adhered to the formal ceremonies of religion; and secondly, those whose consciences have been seared by habitual carelessness or profligate habits, indulged in defiance of the warnings which the Gospel sounds throughout our land, as the law and the prophets sounded them in Jerusalem. The former would not come to Jesus "that they might have life," because they doubted not their having it in themselves; the others "loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." But the conversion of the Jewish nation made a very small part of the object of these teachers. It may be thought, as they purposed to carry this new doctrine among the heathen world, that their task would become easier as they proceeded. Once awakened to a knowledge of their Creator; once acquainted with his holiness, and the purity of his precepts, and his unlimited demand of obedience on the part of man; the heathen could but prostrate themselves in the dust, in humble conviction of the difference between their practice and the law now revealed to them. Certainly, they would do so, when the impression was really made; but how difficult to introduce the light: to create the first conviction! Everything was to be done. When they had been untaught the errors with which their minds were possessed, they had still to learn the unity of God, and his perfect purity; they had to become practically convinced of his moral superintendence; of |