word which is rendered by covenant, and the absence of the article in the allusion to it-though commentators may have taken it for granted, and though it may be an obvious conjecture at first sight, that the covenant intended is either the covenant made with Abraham, or the covenant made with Moses, and each as confirmed or fulfilled in the gospel; I should think it a fatal objection to either of these constructions of its meaning, that it wants the article before it for an allusion to so well known a thing as the covenant of grace with Abraham, or the covenant of works at Horeb, would of necessity have required the article-especially when alluded to indefinitely. And we shall see by and bythat there is no necessity to understand it of either of these covenants in particular; and yet it may be true that a covenant was confirmed or made potent for many, and confirmed or made potent for the speci-, fied time in question, notwithstanding. For, in the next place, that the preaching and accepting of formal Christianity may be strictly understood of the proposing and ratifying of a covenant; that the gospel overture was truly a covenant overture-which was tendered on stipulated terms, and must be acceded to on stipulated terms-may be taken for granted, as too obvious to admit of dispute. And if the confirming of a covenant for many, in any sense, referred to its place in the order of the prophecy, can so far be understood of nothing in the history of Christianity anterior to the death and passion of our Saviour himself; that no such covenant as the gospel overture either did, or in the nature of things could, begin to be promulgated, and much more confirmed and ratified, before his death and resurrection; that formal Christianity was never preached by his means, nor ever constituted the proper work of his ministry; that it was reserved for the ministry of the apostles, and began neither earlier nor later than the day of Pentecost, next after the ascension-may also be taken for granted, however much commentators may have shut their eyes to these truths, and to their natural consequences, particularly with reference to the right understanding and construction of this part of the prophecy, more especially. Again, that by the confirming a covenant for many, understood of the acceptance and ratification of the terms of the gospel overture, in behalf of the proper parties must be intended, the confirming of such a covenant, and consequently the acceptance and ratification of the terms of the gospel overture, first and properly in behalf of the Jews, may also be taken for granted and, therefore, if the covenant, so to be confirmed, was to be confirmed for one week, and for neither more nor less than one week; then that formal Christianity was to be preached to the Jews, for one week, and for neither more nor less than one week, would seem to follow, by necessary inference, from that fact. Among the other anticipations of its own meaning, then, suggested by the prophecy beforehand, one would appear to be this; That formal Christianity beginning to be preached to the Jews, not before, but as soon after the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, as we please, should continue to be preached to them for one week, and for one week only. Are we, then, to understand, it might be immediately demanded, that at the end of this one week, Christianity was to cease to be preached to the Jews? Such a conclusion, we might reply, would be very contrary to the actual matter of fact from that time to this; if it be true, at least, that Christianity has never ceased to be preach ed, in some sense or other, to the Jews, from the moment it began to be so: though hitherto without effect. But in what sense, then, it may next be demanded, could it possibly be true that the confirming a covenant, if meant of the gospel overture, should be made for one week, for many, understood of the Jews, and for one week only? In a sense, we may reply, perfectly consistent both with the matter of fact, and with the spirit of the prophecy also; if it be only admitted, that to preach Christianity to the Jews exclusively, was to confirm the gospel covenant with them in one manner, and to preach Christianity to them no longer exclusively, was to confirm the same covenant with them in another; and that the prophecy means the former and not the latter, when it speaks of confirming a covenant for many for one week, and one week only. The question, which we should have to discuss, under these circumstances, would be simply reducible to this; Whether there was reason to believe that the preaching of formal Christianity having once begun, at the day of Pentecost next after the ascension of our Lord into heaven-the option of embracing the gospel, with all its inestimable privileges present or to come, was confined for a time to the Jews, and at the end of that time was not: and whether this time was exactly one week of years, or more or less than that, in length? If it should turn out, in answer to these inquiries, that for seven years' time, bearing date from the first promulgation of the gospel, the preaching of Christ crucified was actually confined to the Jews; that for seven years of time the parties admitted into the Christian covenant consisted exclusively of Jews—the members of the church of Christ on earth were composed of none but Jews: every one, I think, must allow that this fact will be competent to answer the description of the prophecy beforehand, the confirming or ratifying, making strong or potent, a covenant for many for one week and if it should turn out to be the case that, at the end of the seven years in question, neither of these things was any longer true; that the gospel overture had begun to be made to others, and to be accepted by others, besides the Jews, and the parties in the Christian covenant and the members of the Christian church to consist of others, as well as the Jews; it will also follow that the covenant in question was not only made strong for many for one week, but for neither more nor less than one week *. * With respect to the matter of fact involved in this part of the prophecy, it is not more certain that the gospel was preached at all, than that it was preached first to the Jews; and it is not more certain that it was preached first to the Jews, than that it was confined for a time to them. No commentator on the Acts of the Apostles would be bold enough to maintain that the gospel was ever preached to the Gentiles, before the conversion of Cornelius, or to the Samaritans before the martyrdom of Stephen and no commentator on the same history, I should think, would venture to place the conversion of Cornelius before the martyrdom of Stephen. But if there was a time when the gospel was neither preached as yet to Gentiles, nor even to Samaritans, and yet was preaching all the while-to whom could it be preached all the while except to the Jews-and to the Jews alone? : But the Jews were of two classes the Jews of the mother country, and the Jews of the Dispersion, under whom we may include the Proselytes from the Gentiles also; such at least as went by the name of Proselytes of Righteousness, in opposition to Proselytes of the Gate. Was the gospel, then, while preached exclusively to the Jews, preached to both these classes, or to one of them exclusive of the other? My answer is, it was preached to both; both being alike children of the stock of Abraham, and both alike to be included under the name of Jews. Was it preached, then, to the Jews of the Dispersion, as well as to the native Jews, exclusively? and if so, in their own country? The answer to this question involves a distinction, of great importance to the right understanding of the apostolical history, but one, of which commentators upon that history have unfortunately lost sight, almost without exception; and that is, The next of the events of the class, to which we have given the name of the facts of the Christian that for the time the gospel was confined exclusively to the Jews, so far from being preached out of Judæa, it was never even preached, as far as we know or can venture to say, out of the precincts of Jerusalem. It was preached to all, without exception, both Jews of the mother country and Jews of the Dispersion, who were to be found there, either at all times-as among the usual inhabitants of the city or at stated times, as, for instance, the times of the attendance at the feasts: and I have long seen reason to conclude that, while that state of things lasted, all, whether native Jews or Jews of the Dispersion, who became converts to the gospel at Jerusalem, even though previously not inhabitants of the place, became members of the church there, and were enrolled in that community with the rest. This state of things continued until the persecution, begun and signalized by the death of the protomartyr Stephen: the consequence of which was, that the members of the church at Jerusalem were first dispersed and scattered abroad, all, it is said, but the apostles. We know the effect of that dispersion: that they who were scattered abroad upon that occasion, went every where, preaching the gospel; but with a distinction in the kind and description of persons, to whom they preached it, which though plainly implied in the Acts of the Apostles themselves, has in this instance also been totally overlooked by com mentators; viz. to native Jews and Samaritans, within the mother country, but to native Jews alone, in opposition to Hellenists or Jews of the Dispersion, out of the mother country. This state of things also continued until the time of the conversion of Cornelius, within the mother country; at which time, but not before, it appears from the Acts of the Apostles, the gospel began to be preached by some of those who had been dispersed from Jerusalem by the persecution, to the Jews of the Dispersion, as well as to the Jews of Judæa, out of the mother country. These evangelists were the men of Phoenice, Cyprus, and Antioch-and the Jews of the Dispersion, to whom they began to preach, under these new circumstances first, were the Jews of Antioch. This state of things, too, in the church continued for some time longer; during which the gospel was being preached to native Jews of Judæa, to Jews of the Dispersion, both in Judæa and out of Judæa, to Samaritans, to Gentiles, Proselytes of the Gate, like Cornelius, living within Judæa, simultaneouslybut not as yet to the Gentiles, even those who were Proselytes of the Gate, as far as we know— much less to the Gentiles, whether proselytes of any description or not-out of Judæa. At length, with the formal commission of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles, the gospel was thrown open indiscriminately, and the finishing hand was put |