he and his brethren, are treated better here than in any other country. It honours our national character: but that character, as far as it is truly honourable, is the result of clearer and fuller views of Christian principles than most other nations possess; and I still more rejoice in the testimony as honourable to Christianity, which is far dearer to me than even my beloved country. P. 12. 1. 27. But the real cause,' &c. As far as the tract here referred to is concerned, it is not requisite to make any remarks. I will, however, fairly acknowledge, that after all which has hitherto been published a Jew may have much to say for himself, and with considerable plausibility. Though I am far from allowing that either the Committee of the London Society, or Christians in general, have ' answered nothing,' I must own that very much remains to be done; and that the controversy between Jews and Christians has not hitherto been fairly brought before the public. Detached parts have been ably discussed; but the whole of Judaism, as opposing Christianity, has not been fully and comprehensively investigated. This conviction has increased in my mind during the whole progress of the present work. Not that I hope to produce such a full and comprehensive investigation of the subject: I only say that, after a long course of years spent in studying the holy Scriptures, I may probably be able to bring forth some materials which have not yet been fully explored; and of which hereafter more skilful workmen may probably avail themselves. In this I am rather the more sanguine, as the investigation of the several topics brought before 1 ON R. CROOLL'S PREFACE. 141 me has imparted much light to my own mind on many parts of the Old Testament, beyond what I had before attained. P. 13. 1. 19. As soon as a Jew,' &c. I consider a Jew as an avowed opponent of Christianity; I do not expect him to speak with that reverence of my glorious and gracious Saviour which, I approve: and, whatever I may think or feel, I had rather shew by sound argument that what he advances is erroneous, than meet it with hard words. P. 13. 1. 28. If the Committee,' &c. This shews that the author expected that his thoughts would be published with an answer, by the Committee of the London Society. -God grant, that the answer 'may be for good to all parties.' ANSWER TO THE 'RESTORATION OF ISRAEL." THE title of the book, which I am attempting to answer, seems to throw an impediment in my way: for I as firmly believe the Restoration of Israel' as Mr. Crooll does; and not in a sense so entirely different from his own as he may probably suppose. This, however, will appear in the sequel throughout. In the mean while, it is enough to observe that the question to be examined is this: WHETHER THE MESSIAH PREDICTED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT BE ALREADY COME OR NOT? For, if he is, without doubt Jesus the Son of Mary is He. We therefore, with little variation, ask the question proposed by John the Baptist, "Art "thou he that cometh?" (ὁ ερχόμενος;) “ or do we "look for another?"1 The motto, from the New Testament, " Prove "all things; hold fast that which is good; "2 I most cordially adopt: and, earnestly praying for teaching and assistance to God who "giveth wis"dom," 3 I would proceed, with all seriousness, candour, and impartiality, to bring the infinitely important question to the touchstone of the holy Scriptures. 'Matt. xi. 3. 21 Thes. v. 21. * Prov. ii. 1-6. As, however, my controversy is with one, who, while he often quotes the New Testament, does not allow it to be a part of " the oracles of God;" I shall forego all appeal to it as authority; and argue from the Old Testament exclusively, where the subject in debate does not expressly relate to the New Testament. P. 15. 1. 1.‘MESSIAH. - This name,' &c. If the name MESSIAH be applicable to a high priest; then, doubtless, THE MESSIAH was predicted as a high priest: yet Mr. C. never once adverts to this, or proposes the question-' Was the predicted Messiah to be a high priest, or not?' The high priests of Israel were frequently rulers, yet not always; but they were always anointed, Messiahs. It can hardly be said that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were rulers, except over their own families; yet it is said concerning them, even to kings, "Touch "not mine anointed, and do my prophets no "harm."1 It may be noted, that the word Messiah, or anointed, does not occur in any of the three texts, adduced in proof, that the title of Messiah ' is always given either to a king, to a ' ruler, or to a judge.' This inaccuracy, however, does not in the least affect the main argument. All the kings of Judah, and some of the kings of Israel, might properly be called "The Lord's "anointed:" and Cyrus, who was selected to perform special services in favour of the Jews, is thus distinguished; but the title is given to no Ps. ev. 15. |