that office? Our Lord referred them to the miracles which he wrought before their eyes, in proof of his Messiahship ; and then expressly declared concerning John, that he was that very " Messenger," whose coming the Prophet Malachi had foretold ; and that very Elias also, of whom the same prophet had spoken as the precursor of the Messiah : " If ye will receive it, this is Elias which was for to comes" And here you will see, that our Lord himself explains the two prophecies as relating to one and the same person ; the messenger being Elias, and Elias the messenger.
The messenger then, even Elijah, having come, and borne his testimony to Jesus as the Messiah ; the Messiah is come, and the religion introduced by him is of divine authority ; or, in other words, Christianity is true.]
The objections by which the Jews would set aside this conclusion, though plausible, are of no real weight —
[A Jew would say, ' It is confessed by all, that Elias must come before the Messiah : but John was not Elias : yea, when expressly interrogated upon that subject, he himself plainly and unequivocally stated, that he was not Eliash: therefore Elias not having appeared, the Messiah cannot be yet come ; and, consequently, Christianity is an imposition upon the world.'
This being one of the strong-holds of Judaism, it must be overthrown, before we can hope to convert the Jews to Chris- tianity.
It is said by the Jews, that, because Elias did not personally appear, the prophecy before us cannot have been fulfilled. But I will ask a Jew ; Are you not told, by Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and Hosea, no less than six times, that in the latter day your whole nation, Israel as well as Judah, shall be restored, and that they shall be " united under one Head, even David, who shall be king over them all for ever1?" But is there any learned Jew that expects David personally to come and reign on earth again? Have not all commentators, both ancient and modern, agreed, that the person here spoken of is the Messiah ; who }7et is called David, because he was typified by David, and shall inherit, as it were, his throne ? Then why may not John, who came in the spirit and power of Elias, bear his name ; when, in fact, there was as striking a correspondence between the two, in their whole office and character, as can be
R Compare Matt. xi. 10, 14. with Mai. iii. 1. and iv. 5, 6. See also Matt. xvii. 11 — 13.
h John i. 19—21.
' Compare Jer. xxx. 9. Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24. and xxxvii. 24, 25. Hos. iii. 5.