which God made in relation to the people of Israel, whom he had long before called from Egypt, is applied by the historian allusively to Jesus Christ, where all that is meant is, that with equal truth, or rather, with much greater energy of signification, God might now say, I have recalled my son out of Egypt. Indeed, the import of the Greek phrase, as commonly used by the sacred writers, is no more, as Le Clerc has justly observed, than that such words of any of the prophets may be applied with truth to such an event."

Did these orthodox writers also attempt to persuade people to discredit the evangelical writings by applying Hosea xi. 1, originally to Israel, and allusively to Jesus Christ? The Editor will not, I presume, get the sanction of the public to accuse those learned divines of blasphemy. I did no more than adopt their mode of expression in examining Isaiah vii. 14, compared with Matt. i. 22, 23, and Hosea xi. 1, with Matt. ii. 15; yet I am charged with blasphemy against the authority of the Gospel of Matthew. I must repeat the very words I used in the Second Appeal, in comparing the book of Hosea with the Gospel of Matt., (pp. 263, 264,) that the public may judge whether the language of the Editor, as to my attempt to discredit the Gospel, is just and liberal. "Thus Matt. ii. 15, Out of Egypt have I called my son,' the evangelist refers to Hosea xi. 1, which, though really applied to Israel, represented there as the son of God, is used by the apostle in

and both were deSon of God.' The

reference to the Saviour, in consideration of a near resemblance between their circumstances in this instance -both Israel and Jesus were carried into Egypt and recalled from thence, nominated in the Scriptures the passage of Hosea thus runs from ch. xi. 1-3: 'When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burnt incense to graven images. I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms; but they knew not that I healed them;'-in which Israel, who is represented as a child of God, is declared to have sacrificed to Baalim, and to have burnt incense to graven images-circumstances which cannot justly be ascribed to the Saviour."

The Reverend Editor likewise, in opposition to my explanation, applies Isaiah ix. 6 to Jesus: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace ;" and all that he says (page 534) in support of his referring this verse to the deity of Jesus, is in these words: "To secure to Hezekiah that passage in ch. ix., our author gives us a translation, or rather a paraphrase of it by Jonathan, in his Targum, to which we shall merely oppose that given by Bishop Lowth." Can the interpretation of the Old Testament given by Jonathan and other celebrated Jewish

writers, some of whom lived prior to the birth of Jesus, be discredited from the authority of one, or one thousand, Christian bishops, to whom, at any rate, Hebrew is a foreign language? Can a Trinitarian, in arguing with one not belonging to the orthodox sect and establishment, quote with propriety, for the refutation of his adversary, the authority of a Trinitarian writer? The public may be the best judges of these points. As these Jewish writings are not unprocurable, the public may refer to them for their own satisfaction. Is there any authority of the sacred writers of the New Testament authorizing the Editor to apply Isaiah ix. 6, even in an accommodated sense, to Jesus? I believe nothing of the kind :-it is mere enthusiasm that has led a great many learned Trinitarians to apply this verse to Jesus. The Editor avoided noticing the context, and the historical circumstances which I adduced in my appeal to prove the application of the verse in question to Hezekiah. It may be of use, however, to call his attention again to the subject. I therefore beg of him to observe those facts, and particularly the following instances. Ch. ix. 1, promises that Israel shall not suffer so severely from the second as from the former invasion of the king of Assyria, when he invaded Lebanon and Naphtali and Galilee beyond Jordan. So we find it mentioned in 2 Kings xv. 29: "In the days of Pekah, king of Israel, Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, took Ijon, and Abelbeth-maachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor,

and Gilead, and Galilee, and all the land of Naphtali, and carried Israel captive to Assyria." But in the reign of Hezekiah, so far from reducing Israel to captivity, the king of Assyria was compelled to return to his country with great loss, leaving Israel safe in their places. (2 Kings xix. 35, 36.) Vers. 2 and 3, declare the joy which Israel were to feel at their delivery from the hands of their cruel invaders, and (verse 4) at throwing off the yoke and rod of the oppressor. We find accordingly, in 2 Kings xviii. 7, that Hezekiah rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not. Verse 5 foretels the destruction of the army of the invaders. So we find, 2 Kings xix. 34, 35, that the angel of the Lord slew a great part of the army of the Assyrian invaders. Verses 6 and 7 speak of the illustrious son who was then to reign with justice and judgment. So we find in 2 Kings xviii. 3-7, that Hezekiah during his reign did what was right in the sight of God, so that, after or before him, there was none like him among the kings of Judah; and that the Lord was with him wheresoever he went. Verses 9 and 10 speak of the displeasure of the Lord at the pride and stoutness of heart of Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria, the enemies of Hezekiah and his father. So we find in 2 Kings xviii. 10, 11, that the people of Samaria were defeated and made prisoners by the Assyrians in the sixth year of Hezekiah. Verse 11, of the Lord's setting up the adversaries of Rezin, the king of Syria, against him. So

we find in Isaiah vii., that Rezin, the king of Syria, who, with Ephraim, besieged Jerusalem at the time the city had borne the child mentioned in ch. vii. 14, was defeated by his adversaries. Verses 1220 describe the anger of God, as occasioned by the wickedness of Israel. Verse 21, of Ephraim and Manasseh having joined together to invade Judah. Ch. x. 1—6, denounce punishment to the wicked people of Judah by the hands of the Assyrians. So we find in 2 Kings xviii. 13, that in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah, the great king of Assyria came against Judah, and took all her fenced cities. Verses 8-14, of the boasting of the king of Assyria as to his power and conquests of many kingdoms, and his destruction of the gods of different nations, and of his contempt for the living God of the Jews in Jerusalem. So we find in 2 Kings xviii. 33—35, and xix. 11—14, that the king of Assyria boasted of his great power, and of having subdued the gods of the nations, and that he despised Jehovah, the true, living God, even blaspheming him in a message to Hezekiah. Verses 12-26, promising to punish the king of Assyria, and to bring ruin upon him, for his high boastings, and for his contempt against the Lord. So we find in 2 Kings xix. 21-34, that the Lord encouraged the virgin, the daughter of Zion, and the daughter of Jerusalem, to despise the king of Assyria, whom he had determined to punish for his disrespect; and promised safety to the inhabitants of Jerusalem on the prayer offered by Heze