Hebrew which could not but be singular, choose, without any necessity, to express it by a plural word in Greek and every one who cannot believe this, will find himself compelled to conclude that that word, which in our modern copies of the Hebrew text is necessarily singular, in the copies which the Seventy used was something that might be taken for a plural. The addition of a single letter (and that a letter which transcribers have been very apt to omit) to the word which now occurs in the Hebrew, will give it that plural form which the Seventy have expressed; but, with the addition of this letter, the Hebrew word may be either that plural word which the Seventy understood it to be, or a singular word which literally signifies "the preacher." "The words of the preacher, the son of David, king of Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher.” This, you know, is the title and the beginning of the book of Ecclesiastes. The word which here, and in other parts of this same book, is very properly ren dered in our English Bibles by "the preacher," differs not in a single letter from that plural word which in the promises to Jacob the Seventy have rendered by "the gatherings." But since this word, by the consent of all interpreters, signifies "the preacher" throughout the book of Ecclesiastes, why should it be otherwise understood in other passages of Scripture, where the same sense may suit the context? In the promises to Jacob, no other sense of the word will equally suit the context, since no other interpretation of the word produces an equal perspicuity of the whole sentence. This, therefore, is the sense in which it is most reasonable to understand it; and the literal translation of these three passages, as the text appears to have stood in the copies which the Greek translators followed, will be thus: Of the two first," Thou shalt be," or "I have appointed thee to be for a preacher of the peoples:" of the third,

A nation, and the preacher of nations shall come out of thee." It is no great objection to this interpretation, that the Seventy missed it: these translators were Jews, and would be little inclined to admit a sense of any text which should make it a prediction of the Messiah in the express character of a teacher of the Gentiles. They took up, therefore, with another meaning, which the word, considered by itself, might equally bear, though it rendered the sentence less perspicuous. The want of perspicuity was a circumstance in which they found a shelter for their prejudices. They perhaps imagined, that "the gathering of the nations," though by the proper import of the Hebrew words it expressed "a gathering of the nation for the purpose of instruction and salyation," was only an obscure prediction of a universal monarchy of the Jews, to be established by the Messiah, and a gathering of the Gentiles under that monarchy by conquest and an obscure prediction of this exaltation of their own nation was more to their taste than an explicit prophecy of the Messiah as a general benefactor. The Samaritans, who had no interest in the national prosperity of the Jews their enemies, were better interpreters.

To sum up the whole of this long but interesting disquisition, it appears that the promises to Jacob, conveyed first in his father Isaac's parting blessing-repeated in the patriarch's dream at Luz, and, for the last time, when God appeared at Peniel-in any sense in which they can be taken, contain, especially the last of them, a clear prophecy of the Messiah as a universal teacher. The precise terms in which these promises were conveyed, are in some small degree uncertain; for we find, in the translation of the Seventy, the plainest indications of a small difference, in all the three texts, between their copies and those which are now received. The difference is only of a single letter

in the ancient copics, which is not found in those of the present day; and this variety affects not the sense of the promise, but makes some difference in the degree of precision with which the sense is expressed. The terms of the promise, according to the one or the other of these two different readings-according to the ancient or the later copies, are unquestionably correct: and, according to either, the general purport is the sanie: but if the greater correctness lie in the later copies, then the Messiah's character of a teacher of the nations is only to be drawn from the general character of a gatherer, in which it is contained, or his particular business of teaching the nations, from the general business of gathering them. If the ancient copies gave the truer reading, then the Messiah is expressly announced under the specific character of a preacher of the nations."

In either way, we have found, in these promises in the book of Genesis, of which the Samaritans acknowledged the authority, an explicit prophecy of the Messiah as an universal preacher. Two prophecies, therefore, of this import, seem to be yet legible in the books of Moses; and, by bringing these prophecies to light, we discover a new circumstance of agreement between the character which our Lord sustained and the prophecies that went before concerning him.

I would now turn your attention for a moment to a subject which might well deserve a particular discussion, -the evidence upon which the Samaritans, looking for a Christ to come, were induced to believe that Jesus was the person. What was the evidence which produced this belief?-what is the evidence on which we believe? We are curious to examine the philosophy of the doctrine: we seek for the completion of prophecies, and for the evidence of miracles: unless we see signs and wonders, we will not believe;-but upon what evidence did the Samaritans believe? We read of no miracles per

formed among the Sycharites. That we read of none is not a proof that none were performed: but if any were, it was not evidence of that kind which took possession of the hearts of the Samaritans ;-they allege our Saviour's doctrine as the ground of their conviction; and our Saviour's doctrine carries with it such internal evidence, it is in itself so rational and consistent-in its consequences so conducive to that which must be the great end of a Divine revelation, if any such be extant, -it discovers a scheme of salvation so wonderfully adapted both to the perfections of God and the infirmities of man, that a mind which hath not lost, by the force of vicious habits, its natural sense of right and wrong -its natural approbation of what is good, and great, and amiable, will always perceive the Christian doctrine to be that which cannot easily be disbelieved when it is fairly propounded. The Samaritans heard this doctrine from the Divine teacher's mouth for the short space of two days: we, in the writings of the evangelists, have a complete summary of his triennial preaching; we have, joined with the detail of many of his miracles, the delineation of his character, and the history of his wonderful life of piety and love: we have seen the fortitude with which he repelled temptation-the patience with which he endured reproach-the resignation with which he underwent the punishment of others' crimes: in the figured language of the apostle, we ourselves have heard him preach, we have seen him crucified,-we have seen him rise again: we experience his present power, in the providential preservation of his church and support of his doctrine. The Samaritans were convinced by a preaching of two days: how, then, shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation!

SERMON XXVII.

PHILIPPIANS iii. 15.

Let us, therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded; and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

THE obscurity of this text arises from two causes,—

from a double sense of the word "minded," and from an improper use of the word "otherwise."

The word "minded" predicates indifferently any state of mind,―this or that particular state, according as the occasion upon which it is used, and the words with which it is connected, may limit and qualify its general meaning. A state of the mind may be either a state of its dispositions and affections towards external objects,

a state of its hopes and fears--its desires and aversions-its schemes, purposes, and machinations; or a state of the intellect with respect to its internal faculties -the quickness of the apprehension-the strength of the memory-the extent of knowledge, and the truth or error of opinion. The condition of a man's mind with respect to these or any other circumstances of its appetites its native powers or acquired endowments, may be expressed in our language by his being thus or thus minded. By this great latitude of its signifieation, the English word "minded" serves to convey the meaning of a great variety of words in the original languages of the holy Scriptures. In this particular text,