of redemption, in a restoration to life and immortality, to them abfolutely unknown; it feems to follow, that he also enlightened the Jews by the manifestation of a truth equally unknown. If he came "to shew light to the Jews," could they be in any other state than that of blindness and darkness? To know in what extent he was a light to the Jews, we should confider the state and condition they were in before the preaching the Gospel, as we find it defcribed by the infpired writers. "The people which fat in "darkness faw great light and to them which "fat in the region and fhadow of death, light "is fprung up h." Agreeably to this account of things Zacharias, in his prophecy upon the birth of the Baptift, fays, "The Day-Spring from on high hath vifited us ;" tr " into the i" "To give light to them that fit in darkness, "and in the fhadow of death, to guide our feet of way peace A description, which will by no means permit us to suppose that they were enlightened with a good proof of redemption or a future ftate, and only denied the knowledge of the refurrection. i Matth. iv. 16. Luke i. 78, 79.1 * Bishop of London's fermons, vol. i. fermon 6. If they had been enlightened with fuch a proof, they would have been in the region of life and immortality, and not in the verge and Shadow of death. They would not have been fitting in darkness, but walking in the light, if they actually faw the grand object in question, or the restoration to life and immortality. This life and immortality was the object to be illuminated by Jesus Christ. But if it was vifible and confpicuous before, how could the people be faid to fit in darkness? If it was not visible and confpicuous before, how could they be faid to have a good proof of a future ftate, or a good view of the object in queftion? How confiftent it is to affign a good view of an object to a people fitting in darkness, muft be left to the judgment of others. However, this seems to be the neceffary confequence of affirming that the Jews had a good proof of a future life. "St. Peter, fays his Lordship, in his first "Epiftle tells all chriftians that they are called out of darkness into God's marvellous light.--"Afk the Evangelifts, they will tell you, The day-fpring from on high hath vifited us, " to give light to them that fit in darkness, and "in the fhadow of death. Afk any, or all of "the Apostles, they will tell you their com "miffion miffion is, to open the eyes of the people, and "to turn them from darkness to light 1.” But, how could the Jewish people have a good view or profpect of life and immortality, if their eyes were not opened? How could they be called out of darkness, if their former fituation prefented them with a good view of an object which they were now first invited to behold? And how could they fit in the fhadow of death, if they had been favoured with a good proof of a future life? If the Law had afforded fuch a proof, that proof must in great measure have scattered and difpelled the darknefs in which they were involved, and have rescued and delivered them out of the region and fhadow of death. If we would know, I fay, in what meafure and extent Jesus Christ was a light to the Jews, we must confider their state and condition before they were enlightened by him. Now the inspired writers tell us that they were covered with the thickest darkness, in which they wandered, like men, whofe eyes are not opened? And how was it poffible to enlighten men thus fituated, but by bringing objects to light in the strict and proper sense of the words, or by rendering things vifible which before were invifible? It would be ridiculous ! Difcourfes on Prophecy, p. 7, 8. 4th Ed. to to say that they fat in darkness, or that they had not their eyes opened, merely because they did not fee the object in its full proportion and extent, or had not an exact view of every distinct and minute part, and the opportunity of examining and furveying it quite round. The fitting in darkness, and in the region and shadow of death, evidently implies, therefore, a total abfence and want of light, or a perfect and entire ignorance of the doctrines by which the people thus circumstanced were to be enlightened: it being impoffible to exprefs the most absolute and entire ignorance in more fignificant and emphatic terms? Let us now return again to the text, which informs us, "that Jefus Chrift brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel. It is evident that the word wrw here, alludes to the character and defcription of our Saviour elsewhere, in which he is faid to be the light of the world, and the light which lighteneth every man". The term, when predicated of Jefus Christ, is fometimes applied to perfons, and fometimes to things. When applied to perfons, it fignifies giving light to thofe who were in darkness; when to things, the illuminating what lay bid; confequently it fupJohn i. m pofes pofes that the doctrines, with which men were enlightened, had hitherto lain in obfcurity. If you ask how, or in what manner, he enlightened men, my Lord Bishop will tell you, it was by opening the eyes of those who could not fee before. As his enlightening the Jews is compared to the fun fhining upon a dark and benighted world; he is reprefented as the fource and fountain of light, not only enabling men to fee clearly and diftinctly, but enabling them to see at all. The fitting in darkness, and the not having their eyes opened, are metaphorical expreffions, which, if they have any meaning, must imply an abfolute ignorance. There is indeed a neceffity for fuppofing, that both the perfon and the object received the light in the very fame proportion and extent, fince the blindness ascribed to the one must exactly correspond to the darkness and obfcurity of the other. In the text, which speaks of bringing life and immortality to light, the word is applied to the object. Now, if when applied to the perfon, it fignifies, as it needs muft, the prefenting an object to view which before was not distinguished, does it become distinguishable as foon as ever the word is applied to the thing? |