This foundation being laid, it was natural to expect, and I believe your Lordship and every one present did expect, that the Gentleman would go on to shew, that Jesus laid hold of this opportunity, struck in with the opinion of the people, and professed himself to be the prince who was to work their deliverance.  But so far, it seems, is this from being the case, that the charge upon Jesus is, that he took the contrary part, and set up in opposition to all the popular notions and prejudices of his country; that he interpreted the prophecies to another sense and meaning than his countrymen did; and by his expositions took away all hopes of their ever seeing the victorious deliverer so much wanted and expected.

I know not how to bring the Gentleman’s premisses and his conclusion to any agreement; they seem to be at a great variance at present.  If it be the likeliest method for an imposter to succeed, to build on the popular opinions, prejudices and prophecies of the people; then surely an imposter cannot possibly take a worse method, than to set up in opposition to all the prejudices and prophecies of the country.  Where was the art and cunning then of taking this method?  Could anything be expected from it but hatred, contempt, and persecution?  And did Christ in fact meet with any other treatment from the Jews?  And yet when he found, as the Gentleman allows he did, that he must perish in this attempt, did he change his note? did he come about, and drop any intimations agreeable to the notions of the people?  It is not pretended.  This, which, in any other case which ever happened, would be taken to be a plain mark of great honesty, or great stupidity, or of both, is in the present case art, policy, and contrivance.

But, it seems, Jesus dared not set up to be the victorious prince expected, for victories are not to be counterfeited.  I hope it was no crime in him that he did not assume this false character, and try to abuse the credibility of the people; if he had done so, it certainly would have been a crime; and therefore in this point at least he is innocent.  I do not suppose the Gentleman imagines the Jews were well founded in their expectation of a temporal prince:  and therefore when Christ opposed this conceit at the manifest hazard of his life, as he certainly had truth on his side, so the presumption is, that it was for the sake of truth that he exposed himself.

No.  He wanted, we are told, the common and necessary foundation for a new revelation, the authority of an old one to build on.  Very well.  I will not inquire how common, or how necessary this foundation is to a new revelation; for, be that case as it will, it is evident, that in the method Christ took, he had not, nor could have the supposed advantage of such foundation.  For why is this foundation necessary?  A friend of the Gentleman’s shall tell you “Because it must be difficult, if not impossible, to introduce among men (who in all