"slaughter of the infants, is made rather by way of "accommodation, than completion. That is, it is an application of the expressions and figures, rather than "of the prophesy itself." (Macknight.)

"Then was ful

Third. Matthew xxvII, 9, 10. "filled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the proph "et, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, "the price of him that was valued, whom they of the "children of Israel did value, and gave them for the

potters field, as the Lord appointed me." This passage, every candid person must acknowledge to be attended with great difficulties, for, although here ascribed to Jeremiah, it is not to be found any where in the writings of that prophet; but something in part like it, occurs in Zachariah. "So they weighed for

my price, thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord "said unto me, cast it unto the potter: A goodly

price, that I was prized by them, and I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast unto the potter in the "house of the Lord." (x1, 12, 13.)

To reconcile then, the evangelist with the prophet, in this instance, as well as in various others, requires a candid and critical exposition of both prophesy and quotation, but which neither time, limits, nor subject will here permit.

But from the whole, this inference most plainly and inevitably results, viz. That New-Testament references, to Old-Testament prophecies, are fit and proper subjects for most critical investigation; because not unfrequently the latter term events, fulfilments, where they bear only varieties of resemblance to predictions

in the former, but which predictions, have more full accomplishments in events of earlier ages. And this critical and strict scrutiny, is still more necessary, because, whilst some predictions have a full and perfect accomplishment, in the events of the New-Testament, alone; yet others, in their completion, are divided so as to comprehend two events, one in the old, and another in the New-Testament, and hence these are denominated double prophecies. Numbers XXIV, 17, affords an example of this kind. "I shall see "him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh; "there shall come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre "shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of "Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth." For all allow that in David, and in Christ these predictions received accomplishment. But whilst this scrutinizing attention is proper in all cases where prophecies as above, are quoted by the evangelists, it is more especially so, where these prophecies refer more particularly to Christ's sufferings, and their attendant, or remote relations; because the predictions refering to these events, were frequently communicated in such a mysterious manner, as to leave the prophets themselves in great perplexity, as to the real import of what they had themselves foretold. So that like other men, they had to study, to pray, and to inquire diligently inte the meaning of the spirit speaking by them-and after all their researches, and this very spirit further aiding them, they obtained unto, but general intimations, of what was thus to come to pass. The premises, from whence these inferences are derived, are contain

ed in 1 Peter 1, 10, 11, 12. "Of which salvation "the prophets have inquired, and searched diligently, "who prophecied of the grace that should come unto

you: Searching what, and what manner of time, the "spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when "it testified before hand, the sufferings of Christ, and "the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was

revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us, "they did minister the things which are now reported

unto you, by them that have preached the gospel "unto you, with the Holy Ghost sent down from "heaven; which things the angels desire to look " into."

In this interesting scripture, we are informed, that the objects of the prophet's inquiry, and diligent search, was to know, what the spirit in them meant, by what they predicted, and the time when the predictions should be accomplished; and in it we are further informed, that the knowledge they obtained by these inquiries was, that the things predicted, were "not for themselves," or cotemporaries, but for that generation of believing Jews and Gentiles, who were the cotemporaries of the Apostles. Nor can more than this be fairly infered from this passage. And as it would be doing violence to this text, to extend the prophetic knowledge, to a personal, or particular knowledge of the apostles, evangelists, and their converts; so it would be doing an equal violence to it, to extend their views to a particular acquaintance with the enemies of Christ and his church, in such a manner, as to desig, nate personally, a Judas, an Herod, a Pontius Pilate,

or the other betrayers, and murderers of the Saviour. And as the prophets, although inspired to foretel events, yet needed to exert diligent inquiry, in order to obtain but a faint and general knowledge of what they themselves foretold; so the evangelists, although inspired to connect predictions in the Old-Testament, with events recorded in the New-Testament, yet they, like the prophets, appear to have equally needed the vigilant exertion of their own minds, in order to discern the agreement betwixt such predictions and events; and although divinely aided in such exertions, yet, they appear to have generally communicated such revealed discoveries, in such words and manner, as were most familiar to themselves. It is on this ground of inference, that some part of the disa greement betwixt the inspired writers, in respect to the "potter's field," may without serious difficulty, be obviated. For unless we allow a personal formation and arrangement of ideas, in the evangelists themselves, as well as a discretionary latitude, for the expression of their ideas; it will be no easy task to reconcile Matthew with the prophet, nor to harmonize Peter with Matthew, on the same point. For proof of this, it should be noted, that the prophesy makes no manner of mention of a "field" being purchased of the potter, as see Zacharias x1, 13. Although Matthew in chapter xxvi1, 9, 10, making use of a figurative style, asserts contrary to plain reality, that the prophesy expressed the purchase of that field. But Matthew's meaning is obvious; he expressed not the words, but the completion of the prophesy. And

which completion was effected in the act of the chief priests, when with Judas's money, they purchased the potter's field. And in respect to Peter on the same point, we discover in him as great a departure from reality and from Matthew, as there was in the latter, from reality and from the prophet: For the act of purchase, performed by the chief priests, after Judas's death, Peter asserts, was done by Judas himself. Acts 1, 18. Here then it is, that we are furnished with an all important clue to the true meaning of Peter's words, in Acts i, 16. In this passage, this apostle gives a personal direction of Psalm XLI, 9, to Judas, not merely by office, character and conduct, but by name. This identification of name and person, was not derived from the prophesy itself: But as Matthew by comparing the prophesy with the price paid for the "field" of "blood,” derived from both his inference, as above stated; so Peter comparing David's words, with the rank, transgression, and end of Judas, infered his assertion from both, thereby only meaning, that the prediction of the Holy Ghost, speaking by David, ob

tained completion in Judas.

Should this reasoning be

First.

rejected on the ground of its derogating from Peter's infallibility as an apostle, and as incompatible with that baptism of the Holy Ghost which he obtained on the great day of penticost. The reply in this case, is both easy and obvious, and in more ways than one. Peter's comment on this prophesy, concerning Judas, was made before he received the baptism of penticostal inspiration. Secondly. That baptism great as it was, did not render Peter infallible in all cases, as