lar and distinct predictions respecting the Messiah himself. A body, or human nature, was provided, in which he might accomplish what the Levitical sacrifices could not effect, might do that which Jehovah willed, and in which he could take full pleasure; and this the personage by whom the language is spoken fulfilled, most readily, cheerfully, and piously, without the least reluctance or aversion.

Such is plainly enough the import of this famous passage. In this way it invincibly asserts the prefigurative reference of the sacrifices of the law to that of Christ: and if any shadow of doubt should remain of the correctness of this view, let it be dissipated for ever by the testimony of the inspired writer who thus expounds its meaning :— Above, when he said, sacrifice, and offering, and burnt-offering, and offering for sin, thou wouldest not,' &c.—' HE

TAKETH AWAY THE FIRST THAT HE MAY ESTABLISH THE

SECOND.' That is, he abolishes the legal sacrifices first spoken of, as insufficient for the purpose of a real atonement; and confirms or ratifies the work of Christ, second spoken of, as all-efficacious and perfect.* It is not easy

✦ It has been remarked above, that whichever reading we adopt of the second line in the passage now explained, it comes to the same thing. It may be proper to set down in a note, the various methods resorted to for the purpose of reconciling these readings, the one of which occurs in the psalm itself, and the other in the quotation from it in the epistle to the Hebrews.

1. It has been supposed that the clause is unimportant, and has no proper bearing on the object for which the apostle makes the quotation; and that, therefore, quoting, as was then the custom, from the Septuagint, he does not take the trouble to correct, but takes it just as he finds it. But if we are right in our interpretation of the passage, the clause is important, and, independently of this, it is not to be thought that an inspired writer would lend his support to an error, supposing the rendering of the LXX. to be wrong.

2. It has been thought that the apostle merely brings an argumen tum ad hominem against the Jews, with whom he is reasoning.— They acknowledged the Septuagint translation, and it was enough for his purpose to confute them from what they admitted as authoritative. But it does not comport with the ideas we form of the perfect integrity of an inspired writer, to suppose him bringing forward as seripture what was not so, even although it was so understood by those with whom he is contending. It was not for victory that he contended, but for the purpose of awakening conviction on the ground of truth. At least, if he so argued we should expect him to apprize us of it, which is not done in the case under consideration.

3. It has also been imagined, that the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews does not profess to quote literally, but to give the sense of the

to see how the idea could have been more strongly expressed, that Christ was actually to fulfil what the legal offerings were intrinsically incapable of accomplishing, and thus to supersede these sacrificial observances completely and for ever.

The prophet Daniel may also be adduced as a witness. His celebrated prediction, in the ninth chapter of his book, plainly teaches, that when Messiah the prince should be cut off, for the purpose of finishing transgression and bringing in everlasting righteousness, the sacrifice and the oblation, which had previously existed among the people of Israel, should be abolished. From this it is a natural and irresistible inference, that the Jewish sacrifices were symbolical representations of the sacrifice of Christ. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity........and after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself........and he shall confirm the covenant with many, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. ***

passage from which he quotes-that he quotes, not ad literam, but ad sensum. Now, this is frequently done: and it is not a little in favour of this view, that the two expressions are strictly the same in meaning. 'Mine ears thou hast opened,' whether referring to the ancient law respecting servants (Exod. xxi. 5), or to the common mode of expressing willing obedience (Is. 1. 5), denotes perfect submissiveness. And the other clause, ' A body hast thou prepared me,' means just the same thing; bodies being often used for servants or slaves, as in Rev. xviii. 13, where, in the inventory of Babylon's merchandise, we find horses, and chariots, and slaves, (owpara, bodies) and souls of men,' (See Schleusner in loco) The Messiah, as an obedient servant, devoted himself to the will and service of God.

4. It has been farther suggested, that an emendation of the Hebrew text might easily remove the difficulty. For mine ears, substitute, then a body. The letters in both cases bear a strong resemblance to each other; and it is not at all impossible, nor even improbable, that, in the course of transcription, the one might have been substituted for the other. This suggestion was first made by Dr. Kennicott, and is adopted by Owen, Pye Smith, and M'Lean; but we do not find it so much as alluded to by professor Stuart in his critical commentary on the Hebrews.

Those who wish to pursue this inquiry farther, may consult the authors just referred to, and also Carpenter's Scripture Difficulties, where they will find a learned dissertation on the passage; pp. 536458.

* Dan. ix. 24-27.

If we turn to the New Testament, we shall find no lack of evidence to prove that the sacrifices of the legal dispensation had a designed reference to Christ. His person and his death are spoken of in such terms as to leave no room to doubt on the subject. John the baptist says, 'Behold the LAMB of God that taketh away the sin of the world.** Christ himself tells us, that the Son of Man came to give his life A RANSOM for many.'† Paul speaks of Christ having given himself for us AN offerING AND A SACRIFICE to God for a sweet-smelling savour.'‡ Throughout the epistle to the Hebrews, this apostle speaks of Jesus as a priest-a high priest-a sacrifice; as offering himself to God,-bearing the sins of many-and of. fering one sacrifice for sins. From such expressions the inference is plain-an inference which we are not left to draw of ourselves, the Spirit of God having given it in so many words, that CHRIST IS THE END OF THE LAW for righteousness, and the law a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. §

Indeed, the striking analogy subsisting betwixt the legal sacrifices and that of Christ, strongly corroborates the view that the latter is the substance, reality, and antitype of the former. With regard to sacrifices in general, the selection of the victim, the properties it required to pos sess, its substitution in room of the offerer, its death, and its presentation to God on the altar, are circumstances all of which are most exactly fulfilled in the eternal appointment, the spotless purity, the actual substitution, and the final crucifixion of the incarnate Redeemer. The minute distinctions that have been industriously traced between the sin-offerings of the law and the death of the Messiah, affect not in the least the inference deducible from the above ana. logy, as these differences arise solely from the necessary superiority of the antitype as compared with the type.-In the case of the annual expiation, the paints of resemblance are still more numerous and striking. Here, the exclusive nature of Christ's office as our great High Priest, his mak ing atonement for the whole chosen of God, and his entrance into the highest heavens, not without blood, there to minister on their behalf in the immediate presence of the Most High, were distinctly shadowed forth.

* John i. 29. † Matt. xx. 28. + Eph. v. 2. iii. 24.

Rom. x. 4. Gal.

But the Jewish rite which, above all, prefigured the sacrifice of Christ, is the passover. It has been questioned, indeed, whether the paschal lamb partook of the nature of a sacrifice at all: and others besides Socinians have held the opinion, that it was solely of a festal nature. Those who wish to examine the question minutely, cau consult the document to which reference is made in the margin.* It may be sufficient here to observe, that there seems to be abundant reason to conclude, that the paschal lamb was a real sacrifice. Indeed, it is expressly so called, again and again: It is the sacrifice of the Lord's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt--Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning-Thou shalt sacrifice the passover unto the Lord thy God-Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover within any of thy gates; but at the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even.'t Besides, priests were employed in slaying the paschal lamb: 'Moreover, Josiah kept a passover unto the Lord in Jerusalem, and they killed the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month. And he set the PRIESTS in their charges, and encouraged them to the service of the house of the Lord; and said unto the Levites-so kill the passover, and sanctify yourselves, and prepare your brethren. So the service was prepared, and the PRIESTS stood in their place, and the Levites in their courses, according to the king's cominandment, and THEY KILLED THE PASSOVER,

AND THE PRIESTS SPRINKLED THE BLOOD FROM THEIR

HANDS.' The sprinkling of the blood by the priests is related elsewhere:-' Then they killed the passover-the priests sprinkled the blood which they received of the hand of the Levites.'§ Moreover, the paschal lamb was to be offered only in the tabernacle or temple, the place appoint. ed for sacrifice: Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover within any of thy gates, but at the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to place his name in.'|| On these

* Magee (v. i. pp. 297-321) maintains the sacrificial character of the paschal lamb. The opposite view is held by Mr. Orme in his treatise on the Lord's Supper, pp. 13, 14

+ Exod. xii. 27. xxxiv. 25. Deut. xvi. 2, 5, 6. + 2 Chron. xxxv. 1-11. § 2 Chron. xxx. 15, 16. Deut. xvi. 5, 6,

grounds do we regard ourselves as warranted to view the passover in the light of a true and proper sacrifice; and the analogy betwixt it and Christ is too marked and particular to admit of a doubt that the one was designed to prefigure the other.

The paschal lamb itself, both in its natural qualities and particular circumstances, strikingly portrayed the person of the Redeemer. The proverbial meekness and unresisting patience of the animal, rendered it a fit representative of Him who was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and like a lamb dumb before his shearers, so he opened not his mouth.' Its being without spot and blemish, pointed directly to him who was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners.' Its being taken out from the flock, agrees with his being chosen from among men, a possessor of the nature of those for whom he was to die. Its being set apart some time before, typified his eternal dedication in the covenant of peace. Not less striking is the analogy in the matter of its suffering and death. The roasting of the paschal lamb with fire, points not obscurely to the nature and intensity of those sufferings which the Son of God endured from men, and devils, and his heavenly Father, and which drew from him the agonizing complaint, My heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.' Even the form in which it is said to have been roasted bore a strik. ing resemblance to the death of the cross. Justin Martyr, who flourished in the beginning of the second century, tells us, in his conference with Trypho the Jew, that the animal was transfixed longitudinally with one spit, and horizontally with another which passed through the forelegs, thus giving it the exact form of a person under crucifixion. To some this may seem a trifling circumstance. But the fact at least, is abundantly singular: and, as it cannot be doubted, we are not at liberty to overlook so striking a coincidence, believing that nothing is unworthy of notice which it has seemed good to Him who is sovereign in all his ways to connect with the prefiguration of the death of his Son. The time, too, when the paschal offering was slain, namely, betwixt the evenings, corresponds to that when the crucifixion of Christ took place. And the advantages resulting from the one resemble the blessings connected with the other;-protection, redemption, and salvation. Considering this manifold analogy, we can no long.