Messiahship and Divine character of our Saviour. This point, to establish which must have been the ultimate design of all the Evangelists, whatever means each one might judge best adapted to the wants of those for whom he wrote,-the author of the fourth Gospel endeavours to deduce from the very nature of Christianity, the purity and sublimity of its doctrines. From the pursuance of this plan appear to have arisen all those peculiarities which distinguish St. John's Gospel from those of the other Evangelists. He has omitted many things which they record, such as the nativity, genealogy, ordinances, and most of the miracles of our Saviour: he has recorded too, many things which they omit. These omissions on the one hand, and these additions on the other, prove indeed, the truth of Eichhorn's supposition, that St. John must have been acquainted with, and have presupposed the existence of, some other Gospel, and that in many instances he has supplied deficiences in the narrative parts of that Gospel. But still, this hypothesis will not account for all his peculiarities. To supply those circumstances in the life of our Saviour which his predecessors had omitted, could be, after all, but a secondary object with a writer like John. It surely was not his intention merely to gather the fragments which others had left, to furnish limbs for the Torso (the body) of the Jewish Gospel. The original and finished character of his work, planned as it is with systematic exactness, and executed with measured regularity, forbids this supposition: he himself disclaims it where he tells us, "And many other signs truly, did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book": and again, "There are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written." strong hyperbole with which his work closes, as it asserts the uselessness of the undertaking, so it proves, that to supply deficiencies in the narrative of the other Gospels, was not the sole intention of our Evangelist.

This

The true design of this Gospel will, I think, appear from a comparison of its peculiarities with the wants which must have been felt at that time, by the converts out of Palestine, and which the Jewish Gospel left unsatisfied. The historical collection, which the first three Evangelists made use of, had been prepared in the earliest age of Christianity, at Jerusalem, and for native Jews. It was therefore contrived to meet views which were confined to that age and place; it was

obliged to conform, in some measure, to the expectations which Judea had formed of her Messiah, and to produce those tokens, collected from the prophets, without which she refused to recognise him. But in the mean time Christianity had extended beyond the limits of Palestine, and speculations concerning it had arisen which were modified according to the conceptions of the different nations who embraced it. What the Jews of Palestine deemed indispensable had become of little importance to those of Asia Minor, and was altogether rejected by the heathens. The Gentile converts had, of course, no relish for the ideal of the Jewish Messiah ; they were involved in mystical notions and abstruse speculations of their own: and at the time when a single Greek word, composed of the initials of these five-nuous XQiutos, Olov vins, owing-(Jesus Christ, the son of God, the Saviour,) was to the Apostles the symbol of all Christianity, and did in fact contain all that they preached, disputes and theories concerning the how and the when, had sprung up among the philosophers of the the east and the south. They endeavoured to trace to some remote origin the connection between God and the Saviour, to reconcile his religion with their philosophy, and thus continued to involve that simple formula in doubts and mysteries, till the white robe of Christianity whose purity had been so carefully preserved by the Apostles, became in the hands of those sectarians a coat of many colours. It was then that St. John, the companion and favourite of our Saviour, the best qualified, and at that time probably the only living original witness of all the miracles, wrote his Gospel: it was therefore that he gave the brief but comprehensive theory we find at the beginning of his work, not to combat the systems of the Gnostic philosophers, of Cerinthus, of Saturnius, or of Basilides, but simply to explain, according to the principles of the Hellenists, by the use of the term "Moyos," the "Ivsvua Tov Osov" of the Jews, and thus to render all further speculations superfluous. He did not contradict what had been said in the Gospel of Palestine; the authority of that Gospel was still to continue; it was of apostolic origin and contained the oldest views of Christianity; it was his intention to explain, confirm, and render it universally practical. That this was his purpose, the author declares himself where he tells us-" But these things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that, believing, ye might have life through his name." And with this purpose in view the

characteristic peculiarities of his Gospel may be easily explained. For instance; the Jewish Gospel found, among other tokens by which the Messiah was to be recognised, this, that he should be a descendant of David, born at Bethlehem. Accordingly two of our Evangelists have preserved records which trace his lineage up to that distinguished ancestor. Of this pedigree John makes no account: he considered the only practical part of the evangelical history as commencing with our Saviour's baptism. Of what use too, after the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the Jews, could this genealogy be to the foreign nations for whom he wrote, and who prided themselves upon the names of their own ancestors? In his Gospel therefore, no mention is made of the lustre derived by Christ from the fame of his progenitors,he is simply the son of Joseph and Mary, and as far as nationality was concerned,-not a Jew, but the Saviour of the world. Again, the original Gospel, in speaking of our Saviour's miracles, conforms to the views of the people for whom it was intended; it gives a great number and many that are similar in their nature. For the Jews, according to a narrow interpretation of their prophet Isaiah, considered miracles as the chief token of the Messiah, so that St. Paul makes it a distinguishing point between this people and the Greeks, that "the Jews require a sign and the Greeks seek after wisdom." From St. John's omission of most of the miracles of our Saviour, therefore, we are not, I think, authorized to infer with Eichhorn, that miracles did not form a part of his idea of the Messiah, but rather to seek an explanation in the design with which this Evangelist wrote. With the people of Asia Minor, Africa, Greece, and other countries beyond Palestine, the miracles of Jesus had of course only the weight of distant and past wonders,—a long catalogue of them was of little use; he who could heal one diseased, and restore one dead to life, could, in the same manner, cure and resuscitate thousands. The miracles which St. John brings are few therefore, but striking and well attested. They are generally introduced as the occasions of some important discourse or remark of our Saviour, and are mentioned not so much for their own individual value, but as symbols of one continuing, permanent miracle.

On the same principles we may account for most of the other omissions and additions which distinguish this Gospel. Some of them indeed require particular explanations, but these are also obvious. St. John, for instance, takes no notice of his Master's transfiguration on the mount. This is

1834.] Counsels to Young Men on Modern Infidelity, &c. 571

because the design of that miracle was merely temporary. He dwells particularly on the discourses which our Saviour held at Jerusalem. This is probably to meet the insinuation which might be made, that the Teacher of men had confined himself to an obscure corner of the country and to the most ignorant part of the people. When he omits to mention the ordinances which Jesus appointed and the form of prayer which he gave, it is, no doubt, because the general adoption of these among the converts to Christianity had rendered it unnecessary. But a consideration of all these particulars, as well as an examination of the peculiarities in the language and style of our Evangelist, would far exceed the limits of this essay.

Above all then, be it observed, that the evidences which the fourth Gospel brings for the Messiahship of Jesus are founded upon his doctrines and discourses. It was the author's design to place the character and office of the Messiah in a clear light, to show what was meant by the Son of God, and in what sense he is to be considered as the Saviour of the world. "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," says our Saviour in the Gospel of St. John, "even so must the Son of Man be lifted up." And thus indeed did this Apostle hold up the image of the Messiah, not to the eyes of the Jewish nation only, but to the view of the whole world, that all who looked upon it might be saved.

F. H. HEDGE.

NOTICES OF BOOKS.

Counsels to Young Men on Modern Infidelity, and the Evidences of Christianity. By JOHN MORISON, D.D.-author of an Exposition of the Book of Psalms, &c. Boston, James Loring. 12mo. pp. 237. 1934.

THIS work, though not marked by any originality of view, is pervaded by a spiritual fervour that warmly recommends it to the heart. The author seems to be a man who has not only assured himself of the external and historical truth of the Christian

religion, but has also verified the convictions of his understanding in the experience of his heart. Every Christian, who has made great spiritual progress, must have enjoyed the peculiar delight which results from what may be called the second establishment of the claims of our faith,-that proof which, after the religion is seen to stand firm on the foundations of human testimony and the history of the world, is found in the principles and affections of the spiritual nature. This internal voice which, in gentle but distinct tones, sounds up from the depths of the heart, and speaks of the accordance there is between the teachings of Jesus and the best powers and noblest aspirations of the soul,this is the voice which persuades us, with a grasp that nothing in life and nothing in death can relax, to cling to the hope set before us in the Gospel. After the intellect has done its part in persuading us to the belief and practice of Christianity, and we, having honestly guided it in its examination, faithfully submit to its just conclusions, the heart, with its own powerful and irresistible logic, comes in to bind us with new closeness to that service of God which is perfect freedom.

We express ourselves thus in order to apply our remarks as a commendation of that feature of the work before us in which the author manifests his strong internal sense of the value of Christianity, and in which he does much, as we think, to infuse the same sense into the hearts of his readers. Christianity is to be loved as well as believed, and she asks for that peculiar kind of belief which results from love. She is to be known with that knowledge of the affections and the soul of which she continually speaks.

But let us show what we mean in our author's own words.

"The man who is a genuine believer is as fully conscious, as he is of existence, that Christianity is no cunningly devised fable. It has established its throne in the deep-seated convictions of his heart. He has felt the transformation it has wrought; "old things are passed away; behold all things are become new." His entire character has been favourably affected by it. Upon his once gloomy path it has shed the light of immortality; it has taught him to "rejoice even in tribulation;" it has changed all the aspects of life, by throwing over them the hues of eternity; it has conferred on him a reality of happiness which the whole creation had no power of imparting. In his own person he beholds a monument of the truth and excellence of Christianity; which forever forbids him to doubt. By other evidences, indeed, his character is confirmed; but in his peace of mind, in that "hope which is full of immortality," and in the heavenward bearing of his once earthly character, he is enabled to feel that Christianity is no 'cunningly devised fable.'"-pp. 65, 66.

That the intrinsic moral beauty of Christianity should be thus set forth to young minds, and for such this work is intended, seems to us of great importance. We deem it important because