pious deception was permitted to take place. The father of the late Bishop Lowth, confessed without reserve, that the apostles were mistaken-and the present Bishop of Landaff has been accused, with some appearance of reason, of not having been extremely solicitous to relieve the apostles from the accusation of error; while another learned divine has, from one of our University pulpits, very gravely proposed it for consideration, whether the real interests of christianity would not be more essentially promoted, by conceding the objection to his adversary, than by vainly attempting to remove it. Nay; it has been boldly asserted, in the Theological Repository, under the direction of the late Dr. Priestley, and never, that I know of, attempted to be contradicted, in any part of his numerous works, that our Lord is recorded by his historians Matthew, Mark and Luke, to have declared that his second coming was one of those events which would happen during the lives of some of his contemporaries. And the late Rev. N. Cappe, says of St. Paul, that he had no conception, even of the existence of the church on earth, after the abolition of the Mosaic economy. In a word, there is not a single writer, of any denomination, among christians, who, in considering this subject, has not shewn himself to be much embarrassed by it. With some truth, therefore, you will think, it has been said of Mr. Gibbon, that proud and elated by the weakness of his antagonists, he condescends not to handle the sword of controversy; but darts forth the

If it had been noticed any where, it might have been expected, in his letters to a philosophical unbeliever, in which he directly attacks Mr. Gibbon, by name.

invenomed shafts of his sarcastic ridicule. He approaches indeed the camp and defies the armies of the living God; yet he approaches, not like Goliah, to call forth a champion, but to insult and triumph over his vanquished

enemies.

When such, my dear sir, has been the language of the enemies of christianity and such the concessions of its friends ; it would almost induce you to tremble for its fate. But there is no real cause for alarm. You know well, that the attacks of infidels, and the inconsiderate concessions of christians, have, in other instances, contributed, very materially, to its advantage, by leading to a more close and accurate investigation of its original records, and you may be assured, that this observation was never more strikingly verified, than it will appear to be, in the present case.

When you first mentioned to me the objection of Mr. Gibbon, it was, I must confess, altogether, new to me and it appeared so truly formidable that I felt and expressed to you my inability to reply to it. But, upon looking into the language with which the gospel history commences, a suspicion arose, in my mind, that what Mr. Gibbon had applied to the second coming of Christ, might, possibly, relate to his first coming, as the Messiah. This, I soon found to be the fact, and I now take the liberty, in this public manner, to lay before you, the result of my inquiries; being fully persuaded that it will prove as satisfactory to you, and to all who will be at the pains to attend to it, as it has been to me.

It is unnecessary to inform you that the language to

which I allude, was that of John the Baptist, announcing that the kingdom of heaven was at hand; which our Lord himself, immediately upon his appearance adopted, and not only adopted, but made the very foundation of his whole system; expressly commissioning his apostles to announce its near approach. Say to them, i. e. to the Jews-the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you. Their public instructions are likewise stiled-preaching the kingdom of God and preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom of God.

Thus far, you will, I am sure, agree with me, there neither is, nor can be any dispute. The only question, then to be discussed, so far as this phrase is concerned is, in what sense it is to be understood? If it relates, as Mr. Gibbon has asserted, to his second coming in the clouds to judge all mankind, at the last day-the controversy is at an end, and christianity must, upon the principles of sound reasoning, he adjudged to be an imposture. Here we are at issue and it only remains, with critical exactness and impartiality, to examine what is the genuine meaning of the phrase, as made use of, in the passages above referred to.

When John the Baptist, the harbinger of our Lord, asserted that the kingdom of heaven was at hand; you will not fail to observe that it excited universal attention. In the expressive language of the evangelist-then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan. And when our Lord went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel-or good news of the kingdom, which he had de

clared to be at hand; it is said, there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, from Decapolis, from Jerusalem, from Judea and from beyond Jordan.

It will probably appear to you that no account can be given of the universal attention which was thus excited, by the use of our Lord's language, so natural and so rational, as that it was borrowed from the language of the Old Testament, and particularly from the prophecies of Daniel, and that their sentiments upon the subject were, in fact, founded upon them. In these prophecies, the creation of a new kingdom, by the God of heaven which was to be given to one like a son of man, was explicitly foretold the time of its approach was limited to a certain period and that period was now nearly expiring. When therefore, they heard our Lord declare that the kingdom of heaven was at hand; it was no wonder that they flocked to him in such multitudes. Accordingly, it has been excellently well observed, by Dr. Sykes, that "the Jews were so well apprized of a kingdom which God had resolved to set up, that as often as Jesus talked of the kingdom of heaven, or of God; neither the people, nor their rulers, ever offered to ask him the meaning of the phrase; which, yet, we cannot suppose them not to have done, if he had talked with, and to them in a language they were unacquainted with.§" Bishop Chandler, likewise has observed that "the expectation of the Messiah, intimated in the use of this language, was not the opinion of a few devout people only, who are said to wait for the consolation of Israel, and to look for redemption

§ Sykes on the Christian Religion---p. 29.

in Jerusalem, at the time of our Saviour's birth; or of the meaner sort, who thought the kingdom of God (a phrase for the kingdom of the Messiah) should immediately appear; but it was the settled judgment of the chief priests, the scribes and the learned in their law. They who made the study of the scriptures their chief business, were unanimous in this belief-the expectation was national.

Nor, is this all-The evidence of this general expectation of the Jews and the cause of it, is not confined to the christian scriptures, or to christian writers only. The celebrated Josephus who, you know, was himself a Jew and a distinguished general in the early part of the war which terminated in the desruction of their country, bears ample testimony to the truth of these important facts, though, at the same time, he pretty plainly declares that he was not friendly to the christian cause.—

That," he says," which chiefly excited the Jews to the war, was an ambiguous prophecy, which was also found in their sacred books, that at that time, some one, within their country, should arise, that should obtain the empire of the world." Tacitus, likewise, the Roman annalist, when mentioning the destruction of Jerusalem, says- Most of the Jews were firmly persuaded that there was an express declaration in the ancient books of the priests, that, at that very time, the East should gain the ascendancy, and some body from Judea, acquire universal dominion." And he adds, that "this illustrious prediction had taken such warm psssession of the common people, among the Jews, that they were not compelled to resign their dependence on this prophecy, but