and Luke, where, as in many other passages in which the word Wisdom is to be found, the sense neither requires, nor even admits, of our understanding Jesus to be meant under that appellation.

The Editor quotes Isaiah vi. 1, 10, relating to the Prophet's vision of God; he then comments, "As this glorious vision, wherein the Prophet received his commission, represented either the Father or the Son, we might have expected that it should be the Son, who had undertaken to redeem men." The Editor afterwards quotes John xii. 41, "These things, said Isaiah, when he saw his glory and spoke of him," and considers these words as decisive testimony of the opinion, that it was the Son who was seen by the Prophet in the vision.

Let us first impartially refer to the context of verse 41 of John. We find in the verse a personal pronoun used three times. The first, "he," in the phrase "when he saw," though understood in the Greek verb side; the second, "his," connected with the word "glory;" and the third, "of him," after the verb "spoke;" thus-" when he saw his glory and spoke of him." The first The first pronoun, "he," of course refers to Isaiah, mentioned just before it. The second and the third, “his” and “of him," can have no reference to Isaiah, for the words "when Isaiah saw Isaiah's glory, and spoke of Isaiah,” could bear no sense whatever. These two last pronouns must, therefore, have reference to some pronoun or noun to be found in the immediately preceding part

preof the passage. We accordingly find, from the ceding verse, (40,) that these pronouns refer to Jehovah, the God of hosts, mentioned twice in verse 38, whose glory Isaiah saw, and in whose behalf he spoke, without mention of the Son being once made between verses 38 and 41. The passage thus stands, (ver. 38,) He (Isaiah) spoke, "Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" (39,) Therefore they could not believe [because] that Isaiah said again," (40,) "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart;" (41,)" These things, said Isaiah, when he Isaiah must have saw his glory, and spake of him." then seen the glory of him in whose behalf he spoke; a fact which neither party can dispute; and, as it is evident from the preceding verse, (40,) and from Isaiah vi., [10,] that he spoke of God, who blinded the eyes of the Jews and hardened their hearts, it necessarily follows, that he saw the glory of that very being spoken of by Isaiah. For further illustration of God's being often declared to have blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, I quote Rom. xi. 7, 8: "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber; eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear,) unto this day." Isaiah lxiii. 17: "O Lord, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy

fear? Return, for thy servants' sake, the tribe of thy inheritance." From vers. 38-41, as already observed, is not a single noun or a pronoun that can have allusion to Jesus. But we find, in verse 42, the pronoun "him," implying the Son as absolutely required by the sense, in reference to verse 37, and in consistence with verse 44, in which the name of Jesus is found mentioned. As all the Pharisees believed in God, as well as in Isaiah, one of their prophets, the text could convey no meaning, if the phrase "Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed in him" were admitted to bear reference either to God or Isaiah.

If it be insisted upon, in defiance of all the foregoing explanation, that the two last-mentioned pronouns, in verse 41, "When he saw his glory and spake of him," are applied to Jesus, the passage in the evangelist would be, in that case, more correctly explained by referring it to John viii. 56, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day," which cannot be understood of ocular vision, but prophetic anticipation; whereas the glory seen in the vision of Isaiah, was that of God himself in the delivery of the command given to the prophet on that occasion, as I observed in the Second Appeal (page 286). With a view to invalidate this interpretation, the Editor inquires, (page 569,) "What has Abraham's day to do with Isaiah's vision ?" In answer to which I must allow, that Abraham's day had nothing to do with Isaiah's vision, except that as Abraham saw

the day of Christ, (properly speaking, the reign of Christ,) by prophetic anticipation, and not through ocular vision, (John viii. 56,) so Isaiah, as another prophet of God, must have seen the glory of Christ (if he had seen it at all) through the same prophetic anticipation, and must have spoken of Christ's commission (if he had spoken of him at all) through the same prophetic power: the reference, therefore, is one which goes to prove, that whenever the prophets, such as Abraham, Isaiah, or any other prophets, are declared to have seen or spoken of future events, they must have seen or spoken of them through the prophetic power vested in them by God. I never attempted to prove, that the words "day" and "glory" are synonymous, nor did I declare that Isaiah saw the day of Christ, that the Editor should have occasion to advance that "it is not the day of Christ which the Evangelist describes Isaiah as having seen, but his glory." However, I cannot help being of opinion, that in such phrases, on particular occasions, as "He saw the day of the king Messiah," or "He saw the glory of the king Messiah," the words "day" and "glory" amount almost to the same thing. My limited understanding cannot, like the Editor's, discover how "Isaiah fixes the time when he thus saw Christ's glory, even when it was said, 'he hath blinded their eyes,'" &c., for I find the Jews were from time to time charged, by several of the prophets, with disobedience, and with having been blinded and hardened. Deut.

xxviii. 28: "The Lord shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart." xxix. 4: "The Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day." 1 Kings xviii. 37: “ Hear me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that thou art the Lord God, and that thou hast turned their heart back again." Isaiah lxiii. 17, as noticed before.

The Editor refers to the prophet Isaiah, (pp. 533, 570,) saying, that Isaiah, in ch. vii., "predicting the birth of Christ, identifies his divine and his human nature, 'Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.' This passage the Holy Spirit applies to Christ, in Matt. i. 22, 23." He regrets my applying the above verse to Hezekiah, in an immediate sense, though totally unable to reject the proof of such application, deduced by me, in my Second Appeal, from its context, and from the sacred history. He rests his rejection entirely upon the phrase, "A virgin shall conceive," found in the English version, as being used in the future tense, on the ground that " Hezekiah could not have been the child at the time about to be conceived by the virgin, for this plain reason, that God never foretels past things. The birth of Hezekiah was not then a thing to come; for, he was at least six years old when this prophecy was spoken. This our author will see by merely comparing the fact, that Ahaz reigned sixteen years, and Hezekiah began to reign when he was five-and