his arms of silver, and his belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron, his feet part clay and part iron; thou sawest, [O king,] till that a stone was cut out, without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth."+ Daniel proceeds then to point out the different kingdoms represented by the different parts of the image. The Babylonian by the head, the Persian by the breast of silver, the Grecian by the belly and thighs of brass, and the fourth, or Roman, by the legs of iron. He then adds, "that whereas thou sawest that the feet and toes were part of potter's clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; and as the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken."§ This precisely corresponds with the nature and state of the Roman power, which possessed in its vast military resources, at once the means of domination, represented by the iron, and the seeds of dissolution, by the clay. That the "division" spoken of relates to this discordance among the institutions and energies of the Roman state, is therefore apparent in itself; and though Mr. English talks of its being foretold that the Roman empire “should be divided into many kingdoms," the reader will see that the words, into many kingdoms, * Dan. ii. 31, † Ib. 32-35. Ib. 38-40. § Ib. 41, 42.

are an addition of his own, and that the division spoken of was a division of the state into iron and clay, into parts that were strong, and parts that were broken; into powerful and ruinous institutions. The iron and the clay together made up but one portion of the image, and that portion was the emblem of the Roman state. Daniel then proceeds to say, that "in the days of these kings, the God of heaven shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed."* As no kings have been spoken of but those of the four great empires, it is plain that the date of the Messiah's reign was fixed in the reign of these and accordingly we find, that he appeared while the Roman empire was in its vigour. That the prophecy was therefore fulfilled in him is very obvious; but the reader will recollect that it is but a few verses back that the prophet tells the king, "Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet, that were iron and clay, and break them; and the stone which smote the image became a mountain and filled the earth." That this stone is the kingdom which God will set up is expressly said: "the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever: forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it break in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay,

Dan. ii. 44.

the silver, and the gold." It is also conceded by the Jewish doctors, that this stone is the Messiah's kingdom,* and since it was this which smote and brake that part of the image ["it smote the image upon his feet,"] which represented the Roman empire, it could not be that it should arise in the latter days of the kings, which sprung up from the ruins of the empire. Mr. English, who believes, to use his own words, that "the Christian religion, as is evident from Gibbon's history, was the principal, though by no means the only cause of the decline and fall of the Roman empire," will readily see in this fact an illustrious fulfilment of the prophecy, that the stone which was cut out without hands should smite the image upon his feet, and destroy it. Thus I think it appears, that the attempt to substantiate this interpretation' was prudently declined on the part of Mr. English. But I cannot quit this prophecy, to which he has called our attention, without suggesting to the reader one or two remarkable points contained in it. I have already said, that the stone which was cut out without hands is understood by the Jews themselves to be the kingdom of the Messiah; an assertion sanctioned by the authorities of the Talmud, the Rabba on Genesis, the Commentary on the Psalms, Aben Ezra, Jarchi, Saadias Gaon, Gerson, and Jac* Chandler's defence, p. 100, 101. Ben Mordecai's apology, i. 514.

† Grounds of Christianity exam ́ned, p. 163.

Usually called Beresith Rabba and Midrash Tehillim.

6

hiades, a modern paraphrast of this prophet.* R. Isaac too is full and explicit to the same effect. The reader will therefore remark, what an illustration it affords to the ideas suggested in chapter ii. of the nature and gradual progress of the Messiah's kingdom, that it is compared to a stone hurled against the feet of image, which increased to a mountain, that filled the earth. Could the imagination have supplied an emblem to represent more forcibly the contrast between the condition of the Messiah's kingdom, at its commencement, and at its consummation, or bring so plainly to the mind its gradual and progressive diffusion? Secondly, this stone is said to be cut out without hands. The original literally mean's a stone cut out which is not in hands,'

. The import of this phrase we learn from Col. ii. 11. In Christ ye are circumcised, with the circumcision made without hands, αχειροποιητω, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh." The Syriack translator here uses the same words 7, which is not in hands,' to express the circumcision made without hands, and it means a moral and spiritual circumcision: so the kingdom which is represented by a stone, which is not in hands,' is a spiritual and moral kingdom. This is almost confessed by R. Isaac himself. "The sense of the words," says he, "is, that this

Huetius's demonstratio Evang. p. 377.

† Chissuk Emuna, ubi supra.

Sykes' Essay upon the truth of the Christian religion, p. 19.

stone is cut out, without human hands or strength, by the energy and order of God. Wherefore it is farther said, 'in the times of these kings the God of heaven shall set up a kingdom, which shall not be destroyed;' the subject is the establishment of the Messiah; and this fifth kingdom shall be set up by the God of heaven, by his especial providence and supernatural aid," &c.*

I have thus gone through with all that needs an answer in the first eight chapters of Mr. English's book, except that part which relates to what are called the Quotations, and which, as hinted above, page 82, I reserve to another part of this essay. In the eighth chapter, which contains some summary reasons from R. Isaac, for not embracing Christianity, there is nothing to which I have not attempted to reply, or which will not admit an easy solution upon the principles, which I have endeavoured to establish. Let us examine the latter.

Besides the objections which have already been separately called to the reader's notice, are these, 1. that in the times of the Messiah there was to be but one kingdom and one king; 2. one religion; 3. no idols; 4. no sins; 5. peace between man and beast; 6. no

* Quorum sensus lapidem illum, non humanis manibus aut robore, sed Dei virtute ac jussu excisum esse. Hinc in interpretatione dicitur:Et temporibus regum istorum, suscitabit Deus cæli regnum, quod in secula non destruetur, &c.' Sermo est de stabiliendo rege Messia. Atque hoc regnum per singularem ejus providentiam, et naturæ immutationem, orietur; non ut priora quatuor regna fuere constituta, quæ ex terrâ prodierant, hoc est, ex solis naturæ viribus. Chissuk Emuna, P. I. § 41.