to lead you into all truth, that you may have peace in believing, that you may be found in Christ Jesus, not having your own righteousness, which is of the law; and finally, that you may be replenished with the spirit of power, and of love, and of a sound mind, I am, Reverend Sir, Your most obedient Oswestry, Feb. 1790. humble Servant, EDWARD WILLIAMS. upon this subject with proper seriousness, without thinking it a little remarkable, that the Jewish Christians, in so early an age as they are spoken of, should be acknowledged to believe nothing either of the divinity, or even of the pre-existence of Christ, if either of those doctrines had been taught them by the apostles." On the same mode of reasoning, and with equal propriety, we might say, It is a little extraordinary, that the Jewish Christians should have continued such adherents to the rituals of the Mosaic law, if they had been explicitly taught, that they were abrogated by the death of Christ. Can we suppose any who owned the truth of the gospel, to have remained ignorant of the grand design of its promulgation, if that design had been properly delineated and explained? Or could they have persevered in an obstinate resistance to it, if it had been enforced by proper authority? These were the standards of ancient simpli city! at least simplicity of Christian doctrine; though the veil of Moses was over their faces, and the yoke of the old law fettered their necks!" Month. Rev. Vol. Ixix. p. 219, &c. LETTER ΤΟ MR. DAVID LEVI; RECOMMENDING THIS WORK TO HIS CANDID AND ATTENTIVE PERUSAL. DEAR SIR, WHAT I observed to your late antagonist, Dr. Priestley, in my preceding letter to him, respecting my principal motive in addressing him in the manner I have done, is applicable also in general to the present address. It is not intended to provoke your polemic pen, but to solicit a favor. Since you profess a sincere love of truth, and an openness to conviction, your candid and attentive perusal of the volumes herewith sent you, is amicably requested. The epistle here commented upon was originally designed for your nation, the Hebrews; not only for the edification of those who had embraced the gospel, but also for the conviction of such as continued to reject it. This being its primary designation, and it being, as I firmly believe, Divinely revealed, I can no less than importunately and affectionately recommend it to you and your friends, as an instrument chosen by infinite wisdom, admirably calculuted, when rightly understood, to subserve your best and everlasting interest. The writer of it was a Hebrew of the Hebrews; in the former part of his life zealous for the law, in your view of its import: he was a strict Pharisee, and no small proficient in the learning of the Jews, as well as their religion. Nor did he embrace the Christian faith, which I venture to call the accomplishment and perfection of the Jewish, but upon the clearest evidence and strongest conviction that the mind of man, in matters of this nature, is, perhaps, capable of. He was well qualified to form an estimate of both; and the result was, upon the most deliberate review, that he counted all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord. This, it is true, brought upon him the odium of his countrymen, as if he were an apostate from the religion of their forefathers; whereas, in reality, no man, after his embracing the gospel, better understood wherein the life and glory of that religion consisted. No man had a higher veneration for the Divine authority of the Hebrew scriptures, and the exalted character of Moses. What he before thought to be quite inconsistent, the legislation of Moses, and the Messiahship of Jesus Christ, appeared now, as indeed they are, perfectly reconcileable. His writings in general, as well as this epistle, are characterised not only by a depth, compactness, and force of argument, but also by an admirable spirit of benevolence. So powerfully did this Divine principle operate on his virtuous and holy mind, that it breaks forth into language inimitably strong and pathetic. See Rom. ix, 1-5. Lest any should imagine that his adherence to the Christian cause was the effect of bigotry; that he was only a violent party man, he declares in the most solemn terms, that for the love he bore to his brethren, his kinsmen according to the flesh, he could even submit. were that available, to the same treatment from the Christian church, as he had received from the Jewish. The subject of this epistle is peculiarly interesting. It treats of a religious controversy of great magnitude; indeed, I may say, the greatest controversy that ever existed in the church of God, and in which you and your brethren are concerned in a direct and immediate manner. This is another reason that induces me to solicit your attention to this work, in your professed capacity of an impartial inquirer. But there is reason to fear that we are very liable to mistake the true nature of this controversy; and while we labor under that mistake, it is no wonder that our prejudices are strengthened in favor of our own tenets, right or wrong, while affronted truth, indignant, eludes our disappointed grasp. Though the question, Whether Jesus Christ be the true Messiah, be to Jews and Christians, if properly weighed, infinitely momentous; yet, in my apprehension, it is a question too complicated, or not sufficiently radical, for an accurate inquirer to begin with. If I may presume to offer my thoughts on this important subject, the previous question ought to be, not whether any part of the Old Testament ought to be attacked and renounced, as if not given by Divine authority, but, What is the TRUE IMPORT of the Old Testament system? Was it given with a subordinate design; with a view to introduce a dispensation of a more spiritual form, or was it not? Are the Messiah's kingdom, and its grand blessings, as represented in the ancient promises, and by the spirit of prophecy, of a temporary and perishing, or of a permanent and eternal nature? Before we can, therefore, properly agitate the question about the person of the Messiah, we ought, as regular investigators and controvertists, for the sake of lessening the labor, to come to a previous issue concerning, What kind of a Messiah the ancient records hold forth? What is the nature of the work there assigned for him? Do his offices relate only to this transitory life, or do they respect redemption from moral evil and everlasting misery? If the former, you are in the right; but if the latter, we bid fair for being so. I may here observe, that you stand, in a sense, the representative of your English brethren, while publishing and defending that sense of the Old Testament writings which this epistle undertakes to prove is the wrong sense of them. St. Paul's interpretation of the holy scripture, and your's, are diametrically opposite. This consideration also, in connexion with my idea of Paul's knowledge, disposition, and abilities, induces me to call your closest attention to his different meth od of explaining the sacred oracles. And may the God of all grace lead you into all truth! By the knowledge of his merciful and sovereign pleasure in his various dispensations, may you effectually learn wherein consists the true kingdom of God! With respect to the Exposition of this epistle, by the learned and pious Dr. Owen, together with the Exercitations, they contain, in my opinion, a full reply to every thing of moment contained in your late publications in favor of Judaism. Without reflecting on what others have done, I am inclined to think, that this work enters more into the merits of the cause, than any thing you seem to be acquainted with, as far as I can judge from your writings. Will you excuse me if I here add, that I am satisfied, from the idea I have of the general tendency of this work, and a truly religious character, that were your progenitor Abraham on the land of the living, to peruse it, he would subjoin his hearty amen. When I consider your notion of the Messiah's kingdom, and of the unanimity of his subjects, I am aware of your being ready to object to every proposal from a Christian, be it what it may, as in your first letters: "To convert a nation, such as the Jews to "Christianity, the professors thereof ought to be unan"imous, in what the work of salvation consists; other"wise, they might be deterred therefrom, by reason of "the difficulty attending the making a proper choice "of that which is right."* That is, if there be any force in the objection, you will be right in rejecting Christianity, because Christians differ in their judg ment about the particulars of their religion. But how unreasonable, how preposterous the requisition! Do any Christians differ about Jesus being the Messiah? No: give us then the meeting thus far before you object to less general differences. If you expect such unanimity among uninspired men in the present state, before you grant them leave to recommend their religion to their fellow-men, as of Divine original, you *Letters to Dr. Priestley, p. 72. |