and in the next place, instead of being “thy holy One,” in the singular, it is in the Hebrew “thy saints,” in general.  The passage is quoted from the 16th Psalm; and I will give a literal translation of it from the original, which will make the propriety or impropriety of Peter’s quotation perfectly obvious.  The contents and import of the Psalm, according to the English version, are as follow; “David, in distrust of his merits, and hatred of idolatry, fleeth to God for preservation, He showeth the hope of his calling, of the resurrection, and of life everlasting.”  And the passage in question, according to the original, reads thus:—­“I have set the Lord always before me:  Because he is on my right hand, I shall not be moved:  Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory [i. e., tongue] rejoiceth:  My flesh also shall rest in hope.  For thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, neither wilt thou suffer thy saints to see destruction.  Thou wilt show me the path of life:  In thy presence is fullness of joy, and at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore.”  That is—­“Because I have ever trusted in thee, and experienced thy constant protection, therefore I will not fear death; because thou wilt not for over leave my soul in the place of departed spirits, nor suffer thy saints to perish from existence.  Thou wilt raise me from the dead, and make me happy for ever in thy presence."#

In the 4th chap. of the Acts, the apostles are represented as praying to God, and referring in their prayer to the 2d Psalm “why did the heathen rage,” &c., as being a prophecy of the opposition of the Jews to Jesus; with how much justice may be seen from these circumstances.

1.  That “the nations,” as it is in the original, did not assemble together to crucify Jesus, as this was done by a few soldiers. 2.  The “kings of the earth” had no hand in it, for they knew nothing about it.  And 3rdly, Those who were concerned did by no means “form vain designs,” since they effected their cruel purposes.  And lastly, From that time to the present, God has not set Jesus as his king upon the “holy hill of Sion,” as the Psalm imports, nor given him “the nations for his inheritance, nor the uttermost parts of the earth for a possession.”

The next prophecy usually adduced to prove that Jesus is the Messiah, is The passage quoted from Micah v. 2, in the 2d chapter of Mat.—­“But from Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the chiefs of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me, that is, to be ruler in Israel, whose goings forth have been from old, from the days of hidden ages.”  This passage probably refers to the Messiah, but by no means signifies that this Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, as asserted by Matthew; but only, that he was to be derived from Bethlehem, the city of Jesse, the father of David of famous memory, whose family was venerable for its antiquity, " being of the days of hidden ages.”  And this interpretation is known, and acknowledged,