Christ and anti-christ or Jesus of Nazareth proved to be the Messiah and the papacy proved to be the anri Christ...

Front matter

RECOMMENDATIONS.

The undersigned having examined the general plan and some of the parts of a new work, termed Christ and Antichrist, believe that the publication of said work would much tend to promote the cause of our common Christianity.

The arguments both for the Messiahship of Jesus, and the Antichristian character of the Papacy, are strong and convincing. Much advantage, too, is derived from the fact, that these arguments are placed in a sort of parallelism with each other. No real Christian will be prepared to deny the Messiahship of Jesus. But the author shows, that the very same mode of proof will also establish the Antichristian character of the Papacy. In this way the argument against Popery is presented with great advantage.

Preface

As many judicious and excellent ministers of various Christian denominations have recommended the publication of the following work, the author sincerely hopes, that the mere circumstance that it is issued by a particular Board, will not hinder its general circulation. It is not a sectarian, but a Christian and Protestant work. Both the subjects, too, of which it treats are not only of general interest to all Christians, but of special interest to the whole church at the present time. More, probably, than at any past period, is the Church seeking the universal establishment of the kingdom of Christ on earth. Two special obstacles in the accomplishment of that result are Judaism and Antichristianity. Remove these, and how rapid and glorious would be the spread of* the gospel over the whole earth ! This fact is beginning to be well appreciated by Christians both in Europe and America. Hence, the recent missions to the Jews, and also, to several Papal countries. The author

8 PREFACE.

hopes, therefore, that he has taken his stand, not simply in the great controversy, but also in the great spirit of the age. Let then the following pages be perused, not with the belligerent feeling of religious controversy, but with the prayer of our Lord — "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven."

Introduction

The history of the human race has wonderfully exhibited the craft and malignity of Satan, as contrasted with the power and grace of God.

When the destiny of that race was suspended upon the observance of a particular precept, the great enemy, through his subtilty, effected the violation of that precept, and the consequent condemnation of the human species. But good arose out of evil. Divine grace had provided a Deliverer, and the assurance was given, that "the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head."

Soon after this, the malignity of Satan is seen, in promoting bloodshed and slaughter among mankind. Cain kills his brother, and " the earth is rilled with violence. " Here again Jehovah interposes. Noah is commanded to build an ark, in which, not only himself and family were for a time to be deposited; but, in which, through this one family, all future generations were to be preserved. A flood of waters then desolates the earth, the ungodly are destroyed ; but the chosen family outride the storm, and are safely landed on the sunny top of Ararat.

A few centuries after this awful warning, the great deceiver introduces idolatry into the world. Those created things, which God had ordained to minister to the wants of men, are themselves converted into deities. The settlers of new colonies, the inventors of useful arts, venerated ancestors, are all considered as so many gods. Nor did the evil stop here. These distant objects and revered names, must be brought nigh to the worshipper; they must approach his senses. To effect this, pictures, images, and statues were introduced ; and even these received divine worship ! God interposes again. Abraham is called from Ur of Chaldea, and he and his posterity are made the depositaries of the truth and promises of Jehovah.

The enemy, however, pursues this chosen race. He raises up among them false prophets ; he leads even Israel into idolatry ! For these breaches of his covenant, God punished his people in various ways ; and ultimately caused them to endure a long and afflictive captivity in a foreign land.

Rescued from their visible idolatry, the next device of the great apostate was to obscure and corrupt those living oracles of God, by which Israel was to be governed. The synagogue has now taken the place of the grove, and the Rabbi that of the prophet of Baal. The word of God is now the professed object of study. Learned men are raised up, and schools of biblical literature are established. But inquiries are pursued beyond the testimony of God, and tradition is made the interpreter of Scripture. Soon, this tradition is exalted into an authority equal, or even superior to that of the written word; while the strange spectacle is exhibited, of a people, with the law of God in their hands, yet following " the doctrines and commandments of men." It was at this period, the great Deliverer appeared.

The doctrines of Jesus were designed to bring men back from human testimony to that which is divine. Tradition, philosophy, human teaching, all he subjected to revelation. By his death too, and priestly intercession in heaven, he abolished the pre-existing priesthood and ritual, and introduced a simple and spiritual mode of worship, adapted to all nations, and designed for universal prevalence. He abolished, in short, the slavery of men, and introduced the freedom of God.

This new system met with special opposition from Satan. He stimulated first the Jews, and afterwards the Romans, to persecute and destroy it. Favoured however by God it ultimately triumphs. Embraced at first by the people, it afterwards enters the palaces of the great, and even ascends the throne of the Caesars.

This new aspect of affairs, led Satan to a different mode of attack. Unable to crush the new system, he undertakes its corruption. This was effected chiefly by the Papacy, a scheme more subtle in its conception, more extensive in its operations, and more destructive in its effects, than any ever devised for the overthrow of the truth and church of God.

Already have God's people been, in a great measure, delivered from this tyrannical power. The yoke of iron has been broken, the walls of brass have fallen down. The light of the Reformation now happily shines upon a large portion of Christendom: and millions there are, who rejoice in the truths which Popery for centuries had eclipsed, and hidden from the world. Nor is this all; we have the promise of Jehovah himself, that the very last fragment of this oppressive system, shall ere long be banished from the earth. "Whom," says an Apostle, "the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming."

In applying the term Antichrist (Ave txgistos) to the usurping power here alluded to, the writer has not only followed great and ancient names, but the true etymology and meaning of the word. Macknight defines its meaning thus — "One who puts himself in the place of Christ, or who opposeth Christ." Schleusner says — "In Novi Testamenti libris, semper adversarium Christi ejusque religionis, significat"* — " in the books of the New Testament it always signifies an enemy of Christ and of his religion." How appropriately the history and character of the Papacy have fulfilled these descriptions, need not here be affirmed.

This term, too, has been applied both by the ancient fathers, and by modern writers, by Protestants and Romanists, to some great enemy to the church, not

* In verbo.

existing so early as the days of the Apostles. Speaking of the Roman empire, Tertullian says — " Cujus abscessio in decern reges dispersa Antichristum superducet* — "Whose separation into ten kingdoms will bring on Antichrist." Cyril, of Jerusalem, expresses himself thus on the same subject — "Decern simul reges Romanorum excitabuntur in diversis quidem locis, eodem tamen tempore regnantes. Post istos autem undecimus Antichristus, per magicum maleficium Romanorum potestatem rapiens."t "There will arise at the same time ten kings of the Romans in different places indeed, but reigning all of them at the same time. But after them the eleventh will be Antichrist, who, through magical wickedness, will seize the power of the Romans." Commenting on the passage in 2 Thessalonians, Jerome says — " Nisi, inquit, fuerit Romamim Imperium ante desolatum, et Antichristus praecessit, Christiis non veniet." % " Says the apostle, unless the Roman empire shall first be desolated, and Antichrist precede, Christ will not come." Augustine also employs the word in the same sense. "Nulli dubium est, eum de Antichristo ista dixisse; diemque judicii non esse venturum nisi ille prior venerit."§ "It can be doubted by none, but that he (Paul) speaks these things concerning Antichrist, and that the day of judgment will not come, unless he first appear." Gregory the Great, bishop of Rome, also employs the word in the same way. Reprimanding John, bishop of Constantinople, who was seeking to be made head of the whole church, he says — " Ergo fidenter dico, quod quisquis se universalem sacerdotem vocat, vel vocari desiderabit in elatione sua, Antichristum prsecurrit."|| "I say confidently, therefore, that whosoever calls himself universal bishop, or even desires in his pride to be called such, is the forerunner of Antichrist."

The Reformers generally, and since them, the great body of Protestants, have uniformly employed this

* De Rcsnrrcctione Carnis, ch. 24. t Cat. xv. 5.

X Algasice, Ques. ii. § De Civitatc Dei. i., 20, 19. || i. 6 Epis. 30.

term to designate " the man of sin" of the apostle Paul, the "little horn" of Daniel, and the "beast" predicted by John.

The very same use is made of this term by Romanists themselves. " But Antichrist," says Calmet, "the real Antichrist, who is to come before the universal judgment, will, in himself include all the marks of wickedness, which have been separately extant in different persons, who were his types or forerunners." t The commentator on the Do way Bible, in his remarks upon the " man of sin," says, " It agrees with the wicked and great Antichrist, who will come before the end of the world."

There is also exegetical evidence, that the term Antichrist, in the epistles of John, is legitimately used in its application to the head of some great apostasy from the Christian faith. There is strong probability, that these epistles were written after the destruction of Jerusalem. If so, "the last time" of John, cannot refer to a period just preceding the subversion of that city. It seems rather to be synonymous with " the latter times," spoken of by Paul. Nor is there any objection to this in the fact, that John says, " Even now are there many Antichrists." The apostle Paul makes the same statement concerning "the man of sin" — "The mystery of iniquity doth already work." Each of these apostles too, represents the person, or persons of whom they speak, as those who had departed from the Christian faith. "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, says Paul, that in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith." John also describes his Antichrist, or Antichrists, as those who " deny the Father and the Son," and as persons who " went out" from the church.

The true interpretation of these passages seems to be the following: The Spirit of God had revealed to the apostles, that at some future period there would be a great corruption of the Christian faith. Even in their own day there were some, who^had begun al-

*In verbo. .2 ready to depart from that faith and (o corrupt it. These the apostles considered as the forerunners of those later apostates, who would more generally and dreadfully pervert the gospel of Christ. In a more general way therefore, they classify them all together, but give a more particular description of the later and more notable apostates.

The preceding observations and authorities will justify, it is hoped, the use of the term Antichrist as employed in this volume. As the writer firmly believes that the "little horn" of Daniel, the "man of sin" of Paul, and "the beast" of John, all symbolize the papal power, he has felt no hesitation, in applying the word Antichrist directly to that power.

The author has also to state, that the motive which has led him to unite the two subjects, Christ and Antichrist, into one volume, is that the two sets of testimonies may act with reciprocal force upon each other. The first argument is with the Jew, " beloved for the fathers' sake ;" the second is with the Romanist, pitied for the Saviour's sake. The same mode of proof is employed in both cases. And it is sincerely hoped, that if the Jew shall see any reason from these pages, why the Romanist should be convinced, he may also find something to lead him to his own Messiah ; and that if the Romanist shall here find anything which he supposes ought to satisfy the Israelite, he may also discover reasons to renounce his own system of error.

It is not, however, for either Jews or Romanists that these pages are chiefly written. The specific object is, to convince men in general, that the Papacy is the Antichrist predicted in the word of God. Most who will read these pages, are Christians, at least in name. They have no doubt, but that Jesus is the Christ. The author, therefore, proceeds, upon the same ground on which the Messiahship of Jesus is established, to prove the Antichristian character of the Papal power. To his own mind, the one set of arguments is as strong as the other; so, that if it be admitted, that Jesus is the Christ, he sees not how it can well be denied, that the Papacy is the Antichrist.

There is a strange similarity on this subject, between the infatuations of the child of Abraham and the disciple of the Pope. Both are looking for the proper subjects of these prophecies as yet future. To the Jew, Messiah is yet to come. Jesus to him is an impostor, a malefactor; his death was merited, his name is to be execrated. To the Romanist, Antichrist is yet to come; he is to arise but a little this side the last day. To him the Papal is the only true church, nor is there salvation in any other. Here is agreement, a strange agreement in infatuation and delusion ! Surely God hath "blinded their eyes" and given them up to their own understandings.

Possibly some may think, that in a few of the chapters, sufficient regard has not been had to the unity of the argument. These apparent digressions have been indulged in, to exhibit more fully by contrast, the Christian and Antichristian systems. Popery never looks more deformed than when brought into comparison with true Christianity.

That God may bless this volume for the promotion of the truth, and the advancement of his own glory, is the sincere desire of the author.

PART I.

CHRIST;

OR

JESUS OF NAZARETH

PROVED TO BE

THE MESSIAH.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.

If it be admitted, that, as a transgressor, man needs a Saviour, and that one has been provided for him; then, all the evidence which establishes the personal identity of such a Saviour, must be considered as invested with fearful interest. Who is he ? When did he appear? What is his character? What has he done ? How is an interest in him to be secured ? These, and similar questions, a serious and reflecting mind will not only propose, but desire to them all satisfactory answers.

The mere knowledge of the fact, that we need a Saviour, however deeply felt, cannot save us: nor can any reliance, however strong, we repose in a pretended deliverer, secure our everlasting peace. In the former state of mind, we only perceive the ruin in which sin has involved us, without being rescued from such ruin. In the latter, our reliance being placed upon a false foundation, must, of course, disappoint us, when the time of trial comes.

Besides, one who undertakes to rescue us from sin and death, must demand our confidence, and ought to receive both our homage and our obedience. But how can that confidence be demanded by one unknown ? And how can such homage and obedience be rendered to one, whose merits and character are concealed?

The very existence therefore, of spiritual character, and of a well founded hope for eternity, must depend upon a proper knowledge of Him, whom God hath sent "to destroy the works of the devil," and "to bring in everlasting righteousness."

What then, is the nature and strength of the evidence, upon which Christians have so uniformly regarded Jesus of Nazareth, and none other, as their great Deliverer and Hope ? It is known, that the Jews as a race, do not agree with Christians in this faith. It is known, that the larger portion of the world are altogether ignorant of such a person as Jesus. It is also lamentably true, that many, who are familiar with his name and history, yet reject him as a Saviour. Why is it, that in distinction from all these, Christians repose their trust in Jesus, and make him, and him only, the foundation of their hope for eternity ?

The ground upon which such confidence is reposed in Jesus, can of course be none other, than the firm conviction, that he is in truth the great Deliverer, promised to mankind from even the earliest ages. If deceived on this point, all Christians are in a dreadful delusion ; and, notwithstanding their most sanguine hopes, must still be under the power of sin and the displeasure of God. On the contrary, if Christians be not deceived in their faith, and if indeed, Jesus of Nazareth be the promised Messiah, and " the only name given under heaven whereby men must be saved;" then are the rest of mankind in a most perilous and dreadful condition. Whether therefore the one or the other be in error, the evidence, which substantiates the claims of Jesus of Nazareth to Messiahship, can be considered only with the deepest interest. It is that evidence which we now proceed to exhibit.

CHRIST PROVED TO BE THE MESSIAH.

Chapter I. The Genealogy Of Jesus

One sign, which was to designate the person of the promised Messiah, was, his regular descent from Abraham, through the tribe of Judah, and family of David. If the will of God had so determined, the Messiah might have descended from any other nation than the Israelites, or from any other tribe than Judah, or from any other family than that of David. But since the purpose of God has marked out successively, Abraham, Judah, and David, as the lineal ancestors of the promised Saviour, it is in that line, and that only, that we must expect his birth. And should every other part of the evidence be complete, and yet this be wanting, it could not be proved, that Jesus of Nazareth is really the Christ. He might have been an illustrious prophet; he might have been a great " teacher sent from God;" his life might have been the most blameless and pure, and his doctrine the most exalted and heavenly ; he might too, have effected a great moral change among the Jews, and also in the state of the world generally; still his claims to Messiahship could not be established, unless he were born in the predicted line of ancestry.

When God called Abraham from Ur of Chaldea, among other promises, he gave him the following, " And in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." Gen. xii. This promise was afterwards repeated when Abraham was called to offer up his son Isaac. Gen. xxii. Now, whatever blessings mankind may in general have derived from the Israelites, it is evi-

3* dent, that this promise refers to the Messiah. The Apostle Paul has given us its true exegesis — " He saith not, and to seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ." Gal. iii. Tiie Messiah then was to be a lineal descendant of Abraham.

He was also to descend from the tribe of Judah. When the patriarch Jacob was blessing his sons, he pronounced, by divine inspiration, the following remarkable prediction concerning Judah: "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come, and unto him shall the gathering of the people be." Gen. xlix. Whatever criticisms the learned may have made upon this passage, the opinion has almost universally obtained, both among Jews and Christians, that its reference is to the Messiah as descended from the tribe of Judah. "The Jews," says Hengstenberg, "regard verse 10th, as predicting the Messiah. Thus it was interpreted by the Chaldaic paraphrases; the Targum of Onkelos, of Jerusalem, and of Jonathan; the Talmud, the Zohar, and the old book Bereshith Rabba ; and even by several of the more modern commentators, as Jarchi. The Samaritans also explain this passage of the Messiah. In the Christian church, the Messianic interpretation has, from the earliest times been generally approved."* Gesenius renders the passage thus — "Judah shall not lay aside the sceptre of a leader, until he shall have subdued his enemies and obtained dominion over many nations ; referring to the expected Kingdom of the Messiah, who was to spring from the tribe of Judah."t

The same reference to the Messiah, as descended from the tribe of Judah, is to be found in Psalm cviii, where it is said of that tribe, "Judah is my lawgiver." This passage may have primary reference to the establishment of the throne in that tribe; but its allusion evidently extends farther, and designates that future and illustrious Lawgiver, whom not only the

* Chris, in loco. t Lex. in loco.

Jews, but all the nations of the earth were to obey. " Perfectissime hoc completum in Christo,"* — says Poole — This is most perfectly fulfilled in Christ.

The prophet Isaiah is even more explicit. "And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains, and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants .shall dwell there." The allusion here is so obvious as to need no explanation. The Messiah, therefore, was also to be a descendant from the tribe of Judah.

He was also to be of the house or family of David. "And thy house and thy kingdom/' said God to David, " shall be established forever before thee : thy throne shall be established forever." 2 Sam. vii. The Psalmist in alluding to this promise, represents Jehovah as saying — "Once have I sworn by my holiness, that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure ; and his throne as the sun before me. It shall be established forever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven." Psalm Ixxxix. These promises include specifically and with great emphasis, the perpetuity of the throne in the house of David. Now, from Solomon to Zedekiah, there was included but a period of about four hundred and thirty years. And from Zedekiah to the dispersion of the Jews by the Romans, only a period of about six hundred more: unless, therefore, the throne of David be set up in the person of Messiah, these promises can have no real fulfilment.

But the prophets are more specific — "And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him. And he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes ; neither reprove after the hearing of his ears : but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins." Isa. xi. The reference of this passage to the Messiah

* In loco.

is not only proved by the context, but also by a similar one in Jeremiah. "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch ; and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth; and this is his name whereby he shall be called — The Lord our Righteousness." Jer. xxiii. But, even if there were any obscurity in these passages, there can be none in the following. Speaking of the Messiah, Isaiah says — " Of the increase of his government and peace, there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever." Isaiah ix.

These prophetic passages sufficiently explain the promise originally given to David, and so delightfully dwelt upon by the ancient Israelites in their inspired songs. The perjietuity of David's throne and kingdom, was to exist in the person of the Messiah; who according to the flesh was to be made of the seed of David. David himself died soon after the promise was given. The line of earthly kings descending from him, terminated in the period of a few centuries. Even the dependent and afflicted dominion of the family of David and of the tribe of Judah which succeeded, was terminated under Titus and the Roman legions. All these were to pass away. But the kingdom of Messiah was to be strictly "everlasting " and his dominion without end. In him, the throne of David was to be re-established, and was destined to continue "forever."

The descent then of the Messiah was to be through Abraham, Judah, David. Any other descent therefore must destroy the title and defeat the claims of him, who pretends to be the subject of these remarkable predictions. Was Jesus of Nazareth, of such descent?

This question is both fully and satisfactorily answered in the New Testament. The evangelists, Matthew and Luke, have each given genealogies of Jesus, the express object of which was to exhibit these facts.

These tables are in many respects different; but in that which is essential, they perfectly agree. Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus to Adam; Matthew only to Abraham. Luke follows either the line of Mary's ancestry, or of Joseph's legal ancestry ; Matthew that of Joseph's natural ancestry. From Jesus to David, Luke mentions forty-two names; Matthew but twenty-seven. Matthew has also omitted three names found in First Chronicles, chapter iii.

Now, notwithstanding these discrepancies, and the various methods adopted by the learned to reconcile them, the facts, about which we are inquiring, are obvious in both tables. Each evangelist traces the genealogy of Jesus to David. They take different routes, but arrive here at the same point. Nor is there the least variation between them from David, through Judah to Abraham. Here the tables perfectly agree, and the testimony of each is, that Jesus of Nazareth was lineally descended from David, Judah, Abraham.

In explanation of the differences between these tables, the following observations of Bloomfield will be found appropriate. " As to the reconciling this (Matthew's) genealogy with that of St. Luke, it is best done, by supposing that St. Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, and St. Luke that of Mary. And therefore the former, who wrote principally for the Jews, traces the pedigree from Abraham to David, and so through Solomon's line to Joseph the legal father of Jesus. And it must be remembered, that among the Jews, legal descent was always reckoned in the male line. St. Luke, on the contrary, who wrote for the Gentiles, traces the pedigree upwards from Heli, the father of Mary, to David and Abraham, and thence to Adam, the common father of all mankind. Finally, whatever difficulties, even after all the diligence of learned inquirers, shall exist on certain matters connected with these genealogies, we may rest assured, that if these genealogies of Christ, which must be understood to have been derived from the public records in the Te?n/:le, had not been agreeable thereto, the deception would have been instantly detccted. And thus, whether Christ's pedigree be traced through the line of Joseph or of Mary, it is undeniable, that Jcsns was descended from David and Abraham, agreeably to the ancient promises and prophesies that the Messiah should be of their seed."*

The following statements from the learned Dr. Clarke are also valuable. "Mary therefore appears to have been the daughter of Heli. Joseph and Mary were of the same family; both came from Zerubbabel ; Joseph from Abiud, his eldest son ; Mary by Rhesa his youngest. Thus it appears, that Jesus, son of Mary, re-united in himself all the blood, privileges, and rights, of the whole family of David; in consequence of which he is emphatically called, the son of David"\

There is another remarkable fact recorded in the New Testament, which casts light upon the ancestral descent of Jesus. Luke records it in the following manner — "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. And all went to be taxed every one to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem (because he was of the house and lineage of David) to be taxed, with Mary his espoused wife." Luke ii. Here is an event in which we see most clearly the hand of Divine Providence. The emperor Augustus makes a decree, which in its operation, requires every Jew to be enrolled in his own family and tribe. The names of Joseph and Mary are entered at Bethlehem, as belonging to the house of David. What a remarkable occurrence ! What a public and authentic attestation of the real ancestry of Jesus! The humble circumstances of Joseph and Mary ; their remoteness especially from the ordinary dwelling-place of the illustrious family of David, might have obscured the ancestry of their extraordinary Son. But a circumstance occurs forever to dispel all doubt on that