neider, in his "Dogmatik," vol. I. p. 134, ff. and by Baumgarten Crusius, in his " Bib. Theol." p. 133.*

There is indeed no doubt, that by far the greatest number of the Jews at the time of Christ, neither knew, nor wished to know, any thing of a suffering, dying, and atoning Messiah; and that they expected only a Messiah in glory. This is so generally conceded, that it scarcely needs proof. The doctrine of the Cross was to the Jews a stumbling-block, 1 Cor. 1:23. The Pharisees and Scribes regarded the sufferings and death of Jesus, as a proof that he could not be the Messiah. "He saved others; if he is Christ, the chosen of God, let him save himself." According to John 12: 34, the belief was universal among the people, that the Messiah would not die. Even to the apostles, the idea of a suffering and dying Redeemer was very remote. The plainest and most explicit declarations of Christ, respecting his sufferings and death, were either misunderstood by them, or soon forgotten, or expelled from their minds by their carnal expectations. Comp. Mark. 9:32. Luke 18:34. Matt. 16: 22.

We ought to be the less surprised at this, as, from what has been already said respecting the manner of the revelation of the doctrine of a suffering and atoning Messiah in the writings of the Old Testament, it could not have been expected to be otherwise. Experience shows that the doctrines of a religious system are admitted and believed by those who acknowledge them as authoritative over their minds, only as long as their life and disposition remain in accordance with them. If their life and disposition have become opposed, they then set aside these offensive doctrines,

For the literature of this point we refer to De Wette, loco citato, p. 3-5. Staudlin, in his work "on the object and the effects of the death of Jesus," published in the "Gotting. Biblioth. for theol. Litt." I. p. 252, ff. remarks well respecting the different doctrinal interests which have animated this inquiry. The Rationalists have been impelled by two motives, contradictory to each other, -one, the fear, that by conceding the point that the Jews found predictions respecting a suffering and atoning Messiah in the Old Testament, they must also concede, that such predictions are actually therein contained;-the other, the hope, that if the doctrine of the vicarious satisfaction of the Messiah could be shown to have been held by the Jews, some plausibility would be given to the idea, that the authors of the New Testament taught the same only by accomodation, or in subservience to the notions of their times.

The Supernaturalists, on the contrary, appear to have been impelled by a fear directly opposed to the hope of the Rationalists, and by a hope directly opposed to their fear. As to the latter, it might be said of Seiler, who obviously was influenced by it, that he should have composed himself by his own words. "Is a proposition," he asks, "false, merely because the Jews regarded it as true? Ought a divine teacher to have forborne to declare the truth, merely because it was acknowledged by the Jews?"

either by withdrawing attention from the passages in which they are contained, pronouncing these passages dark and unintelligible, and holding to other passages which seem to stand opposed to them, and which are more agreeable to the heart; or by giving to them a false sense, by means of forced interpretations. Proofs of this in abun dance might be collected, not only from the history of false religions, but also from that of the true. Indeed, our own times furnish examples sufficient to confirm this statement.

Now it does not need to be proved, that the prevailing disposition of the Jews, at the time of Christ, was in opposition to the doctrine of a suffering and atoning Messiah. The disposition which predisposes us to the reception of this doctrine, is the knowledge of sinfulness, and of the need of redemption, growing out of this knowledge. That this disposition did not exist in the minds of the majority of the Jews at the time of Christ; that, on the contrary, the greater part of them cherished the proud delusion of being righteous before God through their own works; that, unaffected by the spirit of God, and ignorant both of God and themselves, they looked only for a deliverance from external reproach and misery, and not for a Redeemer from the far more grievous bondage in which they were enchained;-for the truth of all this we have the fullest evidence from the evangelists.

But on the other hand, it would be surprizing to us, if the opinion of many should be found to be true, that the expectation of a suffering and atoning Messiah was not only far from the minds of the greater part, but of all the Jews, at the time of Christ. Yet even from this, it would by no means follow, that there were no predictions of such a Mes siah contained in the writings of the Old Testament, but only that the whole people, being carnally minded, had adopted that part of the Messianic predictions, which promised more satisfaction to this disposition; or, at least, that those of them who were better disposed, were too weak to keep themselves free from the influence of the disposition of the multitude. But we can prove, by certain grounds, that the better part of the Israelitish people, at the time of Jesus and afterwards, did expect a suffering and atoning Messiah, and that the origin of the opposite opinion is explicable only from doctrinal prejudice.

The principal sources of information on this point are

naturally furnished by the writings of the New Testament. The apocryphal books of the Old Testament, and the writings of Josephus and Philo, afford but little information respecting the Messianic notions of the Jews, and contain absolutely nothing respecting a suffering and atoning Messiah.* The writings of the New Testament have precedence over the other Jewish writings, partly on account of their greater credibility, partly on account of their age.

There are two passages in the New Testament which bear directly upon this point. In Luke 2: 35, the aged Simeon, a just and devout man, waiting for the redemption of Israel, says to Mary, Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also, (καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τήν ψυχὴν διελεύσεται ρομφαία,)—an expression, the strength of which cannot be fully accounted for except by a reference to the most severe and bitter sufferings. Comp. Ps. 42: 11. 73: 21. De Wette knows no other way of setting aside this passage, than by supposing, notwithstanding the strong, especially internal evidence by which the genuineness of this passage has been advocated even within the few past years, that still the two first chapters of Luke were written at a later period. So much, however, must be here conceded, that from this passage it can only be proved that the doctrine of a suffering Messiah was held by the Jews, not of an atoning Messiah; since Simeon here touches only upon the human causes, and not the divine ends, of the sufferings of the Redeemer.

But the second passage, John 1: 29, leads us farther. It authorizes the belief, first, that the doctrine not only of the suffering and death of the Messiah, but also of the vicarious nature of his sufferings, was known to the enlightened Israelites at the time of Christ; and secondly, that these Jews derived this doctrine from the writings of the Old Testament. In this passage, John, on seeing Christ, calls out, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." (ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ ἄιρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου).

* Comp. De Wette, 1. c. p. 34, 35, and the works there cited.

[To be Continued.]

ART. V. REVIEW OF ABERCROMBIE ON THE MORAL

FEELINGS.

BY REV. HARMAN HOOKER, Brooklyn.

The Philosophy of the Moral Feelings. By John Abercrombie, M.D. F.R.S.E., author of "Inquiries concerning the Intellectual Powers," &c. New-York, J. & J. Harper, 1834.

E

We have read this work with so much satisfaction, that were it in our power to excite attention to it by any testimony of our approbation, we would not shun so easy, and yet, as we should deem it, so important a service to the cause of human virtue and happiness. Without intending to enter into its philosophical merits, we are of opinion, that it has a rare adaptation to popular utility, and discloses much acquaintance with the elements of our nature, and a careful observation of the causes which operate for good or evil on our moral constitution. It will dispose the intelligent reader to reflection upon himself, teach him to value little, as proofs of his own excellence, those impulses to good which do not lead on to corresponding action, or to the establishment of some accordant principle; and it will aid him also to discover the causes of many changes that have taken place in his susceptibilities, and of which he may have been conscious before, without understanding their origin. Thus he will learn, that there is a training of the heart, as well as of the mind, and that the emotions of the one, as much as the thoughts of the other, if not arranged and guided to some legitimate result, do but disturb their fountains, and spend themselves without improvement.

Above all, the reader of this work will find, that he is carried, by each successive step, nearer the central source of light and morals, that the beams of a divine excellence are mingled, without being obscured, in the speculations of mind, and that the streams along which he is conducted flow through channels enriched by a celestial ore, whence they derive the sanitive properties which he needs. He will see that the writer enforces morality, by no motives that are suspicious or equivocal, and makes no attempts to expel one vice by encouraging another. He does not enlist vanity or ambition in the service of virtue, or appeal to the innate goodness of the human heart to satisfy it with what it is, but to its disorder

and corruption, that it may be incited to rise above itself, and to become pure by attaching and assimilating itself to what is pure. He does not find the basis of morals in the enactments of legislators, in the tendency of actions, or in any qualities of our nature which may be exercised without its improvement; but in the law of God, written upon the heart, and binding us to his will. His morality is not made up of heartless observances; it is not a beautiful covering, but an exposure of the "inner man." It is a mine that is laid open, but whose purest and richest treasures are still below our view.

It is not our object to give an analysis of the work now under consideration, but rather, in accordance with its practical intention, to invite our readers to some thoughts respecting our moral nature, and the ceaseless influence which our exercises and pursuits are exerting upon our moral character. The study of our nature will reveal the high destination of man, and indicate the means necessary for its attainment. And this is a kind of knowledge of the first importance,-needful to the formation of a character of permanent excellence, and for our safe conduct through an enemy's country, to that superiour state, to attain which all our efforts here should be enlisted.

Man, considered apart from eternity, is a being of as little interest to the Christian moralist, as he is unimportant in regard to the ends which he fulfils in the brief period of his duration here. But viewed as a probationer, with the prize of immortal life in prospect, the study of his nature, of the tendency of his actions, and of every object and power that can act upon him, assumes an importance that is altogether inestimable. His intelligence, his reason, his liberty of action, hist conscience, his readiness to impute blame to others, and to assume credit to himself when he does well, his pride, his remorse, his gratitude and compassion, his various susceptibilities, are all elements or indications of accountability, and proofs of a "high calling." They are qualities, too, which evince both a capacity for great improvement and enjoyment, and a liability to great disorder and misery. Indeed, the history of our race in all ages shows, that there are two extremes to which men may conduct themselves,—either a moral condition that scarcely admits of improvement or recovery, or one of comparative elevation and promise.

It may be well to give some consideration to these sepaVOL. I.

32