Martyr having been formerly a Platonist and then turning Christian was the first that invented this Doctrine or rather adopted it out of the Platonick into the Christian Divinity and that neither the Jewish nor the Christian Church had ever before conceived any Notion of a Trinity or of any Plurality in the Divine Essence The Doctrine of the Trinity supposes the Divine Essence to be common to three Persons distinguished from one another by incommunicable Properties These Persons are called by St. John 1 Joh. v. 7. the Father the Word and the Spirit There are Three saith he that bear Witness in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these Three are One. This Personal distinction supposes the Father not to be the Son nor the Holy Ghost and that the Son is not the Father nor the Holy Spirit Revelation teaching that the Son is begotten of the Father and that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son or from the Father by the Son And this distinction is the foundation of their Order and of their Operations For although the Unity of the Divine Nature makes it necessary that these three Persons should all co-operate in the Works of God ad extra as we call them nevertheless there being a certain order among the Persons and a distinction founded in their Personal Properties the Holy Scripture mentioneth an Oeconomy in their Operations so that one work ad extra is ascribed to the Father another to the Son and a third to the Holy Spirit But this distinction of Persons all partaking of the same common Nature and Majesty hinders not their being equally the Object of that Worship which Religion commands us to pay to God I touch this matter but very briefly because my business is only to examine whether the Jews had any notion of this Doctrine And our Opinion is this that though the Gospel has proposed that Doctrine more clearly and distinctly yet there were in the Old Testament sufficient notices of it so that the Jews before Christ's time did draw from thence their Notions concerning it On the contrary the Socinians maintain that this Doctrine is not only alike foreign to the Books of the Old and New Testament but that it was altogether unknown to the Jews before and after Christ till Justin Martyr first brought it into the Church In opposition to which I affirm for truth 1. That the Jews before Jesus Christ had a notion of a Plurality in God following herein certain Traces of this Doctrine that are to be found in the Books of Moses and the Prophets 2. That the same Jews following the Scriptures of the Old Testament did acknowledg a Trinity in the Divine Nature I begin the Examination of this Subject by considering the Notions of the Authors of the Apocryphal Books Now one cannot expect that these Authors should have explained their mind with relation to the notions of a Plurality and of a Trinity in the Godhead as if they had been Interpreters of the Books of the Old Testament But they express it sufficiently without that and speak in such a manner that no body can deny that they must have had those very Notions when it appears that their Expressions in speaking of God supposes the Notions of a Plurality in the Godhead and of a Trinity in particular Let us consider some of those Expressions 1. They were so full of the notion of a Plurality which is expressed in Gen. i. 26. that the Author of Tobith hath used it as the Form of Marriage among the Jews of old Let us make unto him an aid So Chap. 8.6 Thou madest Man and gavest him Eve his Wife for an helper and stay of them came Mankind Thou hast said It is not good that Man should be alone Let us make unto him an aid like unto himself whereas in the Hebrew it is only I shall make 2ly We see that they acknowledg the Creation of the World by the Word of God and by the Holy Ghost as David Psal xxxiii 6. So the Book of Wisdom Ch. ix 1. O God of my Fathers and Lord of mercy who hath made all things with thy Word or more properly by thy Word as it is explained in the 2. vers and ver 4. he asketh Wisdom in these words Give me Wisdom that sitteth by thy Throne And v. 17. Thy counsel who hath known except thou give Wisdom and send thy Holy Spirit from above Where he distinguisheth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Wisdom and the Holy Spirit from God to whom he directs his Prayer And so the Book of Judith ch xvi 13 14. I will sing unto the Lord a new Song O Lord thou art great and glorious wonderful in strength and invincible Let all creatures serve thee for thou speakest and they were made thou didst send forth thy Spirit and it created them and there is none that can resist thy voice 3ly They speak of the Emanation of the Word from God Those are the words of the Book of Wisdom ch vii 25. For she is the breath of the power of God and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty therefore can no defiled thing fall into her That description of Wisdom deserves to be considered as we have it in the same place ver 22 23 24 25 26. For Wisdom which is the worker of All things taught me for in her is an understanding spirit holy one only manifold subtil lively clear undefiled plain not subject to hurt loving the thing that is good quick which cannot be letted ready to do good Kind to man stedfast sure free from care having all power over-seeing all things and going through all understanding pure and most subtil Spirits For Wisdom is more moving than any motion she passeth and goeth through all things by reason of her pureness For she is the brightness of the everlasting Light the unspotted mirrour of the power of God and the image of his Goodness And indeed St. Paul Heb. i. 3. hath borrowed from thence what we read touching the Son that he is the brightness of God's glory and the express Image of his Person So the Book of Ecclesiasticus saith ch xxv 3. That it is come out of the mouth of the most High 4ly There are several Names in Scripture which serve to express the second Person the Son the Word the Wisdom the Angel of the Lord but who is the Lord indeed Now those Authors use all these Names to express a second Person For they acknowledge a Father and a Son by a natural consequence Thus the Author of Ecclesiasticus ch li. 10. I called upon the Lord the father of my Lord in the same way as David speaks of the Messias Psal ii and Psal cx and as Solomon in his Proverbs ch viii 25. as of a Son in the bosom of his Father and ch xxx 4. What is his Sons name if thou canst tell They speak of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as
shall bring him witnesses to establish them I know that they pretend commonly the name of Elohim which is Plural is given to God to express his several Virtues But beyond that they maintain that Scripture hath affected this style of Plurality because of those two the Cochma or Wisdom and the Bina or understanding which are spoken Prov. 3.19 where Solomon reflects upon the Author of the Creation and they alledg upon this Subject the place of Ecclesiastes ch xii 1. where Creators are mentioned Bachaje in Pentat fol. 4. col 2. col 4. R. Joseph de Karnitol in Saare Tsedec fol. 7. col 2. As they study in a special manner the History of the Creation and consider very nicely every expression thereof they take notice that the Jerusalem Targum hath translated those words in the beginning Bereshit God created Heaven and Earth by these God created by his Wisdom which is call'd the beginning Prov. viii and so that Onkelos hath not translated the word Bereschit by the word Kadmita which signifies the beginning of time but by the word Bekadmin which signifies the ancient or the first which is the Title they give to Wisdom according to the same place of Solomon which I have quoted This is the Notion of the Book Habbahir of the Zohar of the Rabboth whose words are related at large by R. Menachem de Rekanati in Pentat fol. 1. col 1 2. of the Venice Edit by Bombergue They maintain the Wisdom which is spoken of by Solomon to be the cause by which all particular Beings have been formed and they call it the second number which proceeds from the first as from his spring and brings from it the influx of all blessings This is the Doctrine of R. Nechouniah ben Cana and of the Author of Rabboth which R. Menachem quotes at large Ibid. fol. 1. col 1. They teach that because God hath created by his Wisdom as the Soul acts by her Body they cannot say there was not an absolute and perfect unity in the work of the Creation This is the Doctrine of the Zohar followed by R. Menachem de Rekanat Ibid. col 2. And indeed they acknowledg not only that Wisdom to have been the efficient cause of the Word but they acknowledg also the Bina as such an efficient cause with God from hence they pretend that God hath founded the World by his two Hands as it is said by Isa ch xlviii 13. so Bachaje in Gen. fol. 3. col 2. And this Notion agreeth exactly with what is said by Moses that the Spirit of God moved it self upon the face of the Abyss For it was not of a created wind but of a Divine and Increated Being which Moses speaks there and which is spoken of by David Psal xxxiii 6. as it is acknowledged by Leo Hebraeus Dial. de Amore and by Menasseh ben Israel Concil in Gen. Q. 2. § 7. and by many others It is to be noted as the first Christians make use of the word Number when they speak of the Divine Wisdom acknowledging that it differs in Number but not in Substance from the Eternal Father So Justin doth against Tryphon and do acknowledge some degrees between the Three Persons So doth Tertullian in some places and afterwards they have made use of the word Person So the Ancient Jews have among them the same Terms which shews they had the same Ideas They speak of the Sephiroth that is of the Numbers in the Godhead they speak of the several Madregoth which is Degrees they speak of Prosopin which is Persons as I have shewn before They cannot express their mind more distinctly than when they distinguish 1. He and Thou which is the Characteristical distinction of Persons and when they apply these Pronouns to the Persons which they conceive in the Godhead So they say that Thou belongs to Wisdom and He to the God which is absconded R. Menach Ibid. fol. 22. col 2. fol. 45. col 1. They give to them their Characteristical Names so they make the name Anochi to belong to God absconded they refer the name of any to the Shekinah or Memra which is the same to them as I shall shew afterwards See R. Menach in Pent. fol. 149. col 4. They refer to these Persons the Consultations and Speeches of God as directed to many as Let us make man which contains a deep Mystery as says Bachaje but which others would elude by maintaining that God speaks to Angels So doth R. Menach de Rek fol. 35. col 4. So they conceive that when it is said in Scripture that God speaks with his Heart then God speaks with his Shekinah 'T is their Remark upon Gen. xi Let us come down R. Men. fol. 27. col 2. fol. 28. col 2. So they acknowledge distinctly in these words Gen. xix 24. And Jehovah rained upon Sodom from Jehovah that those Two Jehovah are Two Persons which they call expresly Two Prosopin R. Menach fol. 11. col 1. fol. 63. col 4. So in the History of the Tower of Babel Ibid. fol. 28. col 3. They distinguish exactly the Characteristical Actions which belong to these Persons So they attribute to the God absconded to have acted in the Creation by his Wisdom and by his Understanding R. Menach fol. 1. from Breschit Rabba and that according to Solomon Prov. iii. and to David Psal xxxiii 6. They say that this Wisdom is called the Beginning although she is but the second Sephira because beyond her they can know nothing the first Sephira being unknown to all Creatures 'T is the Doctrine of the Book Jetzira and of the Zohar related by R. Men. fol. 1. col 3. They maintain that 't is the Shekinah or Wisdom which rules the World according to Solomon's words Prov. viii R. Men. fol. 35. col 1. I shall shew in one of the next Chapters that they refer to the Shekinah or Memra almost all the Appearances of God which are mentioned in Scripture according to the Ideas of the Targum That can be seen in the Comments of Ramban and of Bachaje upon the Pentateuch I quote here only R. Menachem because he brings the very Words of the Authors who lived before him so that his Authority is not alone but upheld by the Consent of old Authors Now he and his Authors teach constantly That 't was the Shekinah which appeared to Adam after his Sin and made him some Cloaths fol. 59. col 4. That it appeared to Abraham fol. 35. col 2. That it appeared to Jacob at Night fol. 36. col 2. And to the same upon the Ladder fol. 41 42. That it appeared to Moses Exod. iii. fol. 55. col 2. And to the People upon Mount Sina fol. 56. col 2. That it spake to Moses and gave the Law to the People fol. 57. col 2 3. fol. 58. col 1. fol. 84. col 1. col 2. There are many other special Acts which they refer constantly
shortness of what we have to say in the following part of this Chapter For being now to treat of those Divine Appearances that are recorded in the other Books of Scripture after the Pentateuch we shall find those Appearances fewer and fewer till they come quite to cease in the Jewish Church For when once the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was setled as the King of Israel between the Cherubims He is not to be look'd for in other places And of those Books of Scripture in which the following Appearances are mentioned we have not so many Paraphrases as we have of the five Books of Moses One Paraphrase is all that we have of most of the Books we now speak of But after all we have reason to thank God that that Evidence of the Divine Appearances of the Word of God has been so abundantly sufficient that we have no need of any more So that of the following Appearances of God or of a Worshipt Angel it will be enough to shew that the ancient Jewish Church had the same Notion that they had of those already mentioned out of the five Books of Moses We read but of one Divine appearance to Joshua and that is of one that came to him as a man with a drawn-sword in his hand calling himself the Captain of the Lord's Host Josh v. 13 14. Some would have it that this was a created Angel But certainly Joshua did not take him to be such otherwise he would not have fallen down on his face and worshipped him as he did v. 14. Nor would a created Angel have taken it of him without giving him a present reproof as the Angel did to St. John in the like Case Rev. xix 10. xxii 9. But this Divine Person was so far from reproving him for having done too much that he commanded him to go on and do yet much more requiring of him the highest acknowledgment of a Divine Presence that was used among the Eastern Nations in these words Loose thy Shoo from off thy foot for the ground whereon thou standest is holy Now considering that these are the very same words that God used to Moses in Exod. iii. 2 3. We see a plain reason why God should command this to Joshua It was for the strengthening of his faith to let him know that as he was now in Moses's stead so God would be the same to him that he had been to Moses And particularly with respect to that trial which required a more than ordinary measure of faith the difficulty of taking the strong City of Jericho with such an Army as he had without any provision for a Siege the Lord said unto him Josh vi 2. See I have given Jericho into thy hand None but God could say and do this and the Text plainly saith It was the Lord. And that the Lord who thus appeared as a Warrier and called himself Captain of the Lord's Host was no other than the Word this was plainly the sense of the ancient Jewish Church as appears by what remains of it in their Paraphrase on Josh x. 42. xxiii 3 10. which saith It was the Word of the Lord that fought for them and v. 13. which saith It was the VVord which cast out the Nations before them And indeed this very judgment of the Old Synagogue is to be seen not only in their Targums till this day but in their most ancient Books as Rabboth fol. 108. col 3. Zohar par 3. fol. 139. col 3. Tanch ad Exod. 3. Ramb. ad Exod. 3. Bach. fol. 69. 2. The learned Masius in Josh v. 13.14 hath translated the words of Ramban and he hath preferred his Interpretation which is the most ancient amongst the Jews to the sense of the Commentators of the Church of Rome Of Divine Appearances in the Book of Judges we read of one to Gideon that seems to have been of an Angel of God for so he is called Judg. vi 11 12. And again v. 20 21 22. In this last place it is also said that Gideon perceived he was an Angel of the Lord i. e. He saw that this was an Heavenly Person that came to him with a Message from God And yet that he was no created Angel it seems by his being oftner called the Lord v. 14 16 23 24 25 27. And Gideon in that whole History never address'd himself to any other but God The Message delivered from God by this Angel to Gideon ver 16. is thus rendred in the Targum Surely my Word shall be thy help and thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man The Word that help'd Gideon against the Midianites was no other than he that appeared to Joshua with a Sword in his hand Josh v. 13. That was now the Sword of the Lord and of Gideon Judg. vii 18 20. And what the Ancient Jewish Church meant by the Word of the Lord in this place one may guess by their Targum on Judg. vi 12 13. Where the Angel saying to Gideon The Word of the Lord is thy help he answered Is the Shekinah of the Lord our help whence then hath all this happen'd to us It is plain by this Paraphrase that they reckoned the Word of the Lord to be the same with the Shekinah of the Lord even him by whom God so gloriously appeared for their deliverance And indeed they could hardly be mistaken in the Person of that Angel who saith that his Name is Pele the Wonderful which is used Isaiah ix amongst the Names of the Messias which Name the Jews make a shift to appropriate to God exclusively to the Messias The Angel that appeared to Manoah Judg. xiii could seem to have been no other than a created Angel but the Name which he takes of Pele the Wonderful shews that he was the Word of the Lord or the Angel of the Lord l. lxiii 8. In the first Book of Samuel we read of no other such Appearance but that which God made to Samuel 1 Sam. iii. 21. and that was only by a Voice from the Temple of the Lord where the Ark was at that time ver 3 4. The same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a Temple and a Palace and so the Tabernacle was called in which the Ark was then in Shiloh There it was that God revealed himself to Samuel by the Word of the Lord ver 21. But that in the Opinion of the Ancient Jewish Church the Word of the Lord was their King and the Tabernacle was his Palace where his Throne was upon the Ark between the Cherubims and that from thence the Word gave his Oracles all this has been so fully proved before in this Chapter that to prove it here again would be superfluous and therefore I take it for granted that in their Opinion it was the Word of the Lord from whom this Voice came to Samuel In the Second Book of Samuel we read how upon David's Sin in numbring the People â—â—d sent the Prophet Gad to give him his
expresly told the Jews that he was withal to be God blessed for ever The force and evidence of the Proofs of those Doctrines is so great and the Proofs themselves so numerous that Hereticks could not avoid them but by setting up Opinions directly opposite to the Scriptures On the other side the Hereticks were so gravelled that they broke into Opinions quite contrary one to another which greatly contributed to confirm the Faith of them whom they opposed in those Articles so that it still subsisted whereas the opposite Heresies perish'd in a manner as soon as broacht The meanness of Christ and his shameful Death moved the Ebionites in the very first Age after him to look upon him as a meer Man though exalted by God's Grace to the Dignity of a Prophet But the Cerinthians another sort of Hereticks maintained that the Word did operate in him though at the same time they denied the personal and inseparable Vnion of that Word with this human Nature In the beginning of the Third Century some had much ado to receive the Doctrine of the Trinity by reason that they could not reconcile it with that of the Vnity of God But Praxeas Noetus and Sabellius who opposed that Doctrine were soon obliged to recant And then from one Extremity they shortly fell into another For being satisfied that the Scripture does attribute to the Father to the Son and to the Holy Ghost the divine Nature which is constantly in the Old Testament expressed by the Name Jehovah they undertook contrary to the plain Notions of Scripture to maintain that there was but One Person in God which had appeared the same under three differing Names Whereas some others did so plainly see the distinction which the Scripture makes between the Persons that they chose rather to own Three distinct Essences than to deny that there are Three Persons in God as the Scripture does invincibly prove Two sorts of Hereticks did formerly oppose the Divinity of Christ Some did acknowledge that as to his divine Nature he was before the World and that by it he had made the World though Himself as to that nature was created before the World and these afterwards formed the Arian Sect. Others but very few such as Artemas and Theodotus denied that Christ was before he was born of the Virgin They acknowledged in him no other besides the human Nature which said they God had raised to a very high Dignity by giving to it a Power almost infinite And in this they made his Godhead to consist But these two sorts of Hereticks were happily destroyed one by the other for the Arians on the one side did confound Artemas his Disciples by proving from places of Scripture that Christ was before the Virgin nay before the World And on the other side Absurdity and Idolatry were proved upon the Arians both because they acknowledged more than one divine Nature and because they worshipped a Creature whereas by the Christian Religion God alone ought to be worshipped Artemas his Disciples were so few and so severely condemned even whilst the Church laboured under Persecutions that their Name is hardly remembred at this day which clearly shews how strange their Doctrine appeared to them who examined it by the Books of the Old and the New Testament As for the Arians they made it is true more noise in the World by the help of two or three of Constantine's Successors who by violent Methods endeavoured to spread their Opinion But that very thing made their Sect odious and in a little time quite ruined the credit of it Within a hundred and fifty years or thereabouts after their first Rise there hardly remained any Professors of it which plainly shews that they could not answer those Arguments from Scripture which were urged against them I observe this last thing that Arius's Heresy was destroyed by Proofs from Scripture for the Eternal Divinity of our Saviour though it was a long time countenanced by the Roman Emperours by the Vandal Kings in Africk and by the Kings of the Goths both in Spain and in Italy lest any should fancy it was extinguished only by Imperial Laws and Temporal Punishments Besides that the first Inventors of that Heresy had spread it before such time as Constantine by vanquishing Licinius became Master of the World Whoever shall consider that the Christian Religion had before Arius already suffered ten Persecutions without shrinking under them will easily see that all the Power of Constantine and of his Orthodox Successors who punished the Arian Professors had never been great enough to suppress their Opinion if it had not been a Gospel-doctrine not to say that these Laws and their Authority extended no further than the Roman Empire What had happen'd in those ancient Times soon after the Christian Church was establisht happened likewise again in the last Century at the Reformation of the Western Church As in those early days there arose many Heresies entirely opposite one to the other so in these latter times the very same was seen among us For when God raised up many Great Men to reform the Church in this and our neighbouring Kingdoms there appeared soon after some Men who being weary of the Popish Tyranny both in Doctrine and Worship did fancy that they might make a more perfect Reformation if they could remove out of the Christian Religion those things which human Reason was apt to stumble at And the Roman Church having obtruded upon her Votaries such Mysteries as were directly repugnant to Reason they imagined that the Doctrines of the Trinity and of Christ's Divinity were of that number and thus used all their Endeavours to prove that they were absurd and contradictory Had not these Doctrines been grounded on the Authority of the Books of the Old and the New Testament they might easily enough have confuted them But being forced to own the Authority of those Books which they durst not attack for fear of being detested by all Christians they fell into the same opposite Extremes into which those Hereticks of old had fallen when they opposed these fundamental Doctrines of Christianity and thus were as divided in Opinions about those matters as the ancient Hereticks had been before them For whilst some of them as Laelius Socinus and his Nephew Faustus denied the Divinity of Christ and thus revived the Opinion of Artemas and his Disciples others seeing how absurd the Answers were that Socinus and his Followers gave to those places of Scripture which assert the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ run so far to the contrary of this Socinian Heresy that they acknowledged three Gods And not only the Adversaries of Socinus but even some of his Disciples did oppose his Opinion moved thereto by the Authority of Scripture For he held it a fundamental Article of the Christian Faith that Christ is to be adored in which he was a downright Idolater in adoring Christ as true God when he believed Christ to be a meer
so well satisfied of the truth of what I advance that he thought fit to Comment those very Apocryphal Books and to shew that they followed almost always the Ideas and the very words of the Authors of the Old Testament But as he was a Man of a deep sense seeing that they might be turned against the Socinian cause which he favoured too much he did things which he judged fit to make their authority useless against the Socinians And first he advanced without any proof that those things which were so like to the Ideas of the New Testament had been inserted in those Books by Christians according to their notions and not according to the notions of the Synagogue 2ly He endeavoured to give another sense to the places which some Fathers in the second and third Century had quoted from these Books to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Divinity of our Saviour Now since the Socinian Authors have employed against the authority of these Apocryphal Books the very Solutions which Grotius made use of to lessen their authority it is necessary being resolved to quote them for the settling of the Jewish Tradition to shew how much Grotius whose steps the Socinians trod in was out in his Judgment 1. Then I suppose with Grotius that those Apocryphal Books were written by several Jewish Authors many years before Jesus Christ appeared The third Book of the Macchabees which is indeed the first hath been written by a Jew of Egypt under Ptolomaeus Philopater that is about two hundred years before the Birth of our Saviour It contains the History of the Persecution of the Jews in Egypt and was cited by Josephus in his Book de Macchabaeis The first Book of Macchabees as we call it now hath been written in Judea by a Jew and originally in Hebrew which is lost many Centuries ago We have the translation of it which hath been quoted by Josephus who gives often the same acccount of things as we have in that Book It hath been written probably 150. years before the Birth of our Saviour The second Book of Macchabees hath originally been written in Greek in Egypt and is but an extract of the four Books of Jason the Grecian a Jew of Egypt who had writ the History of the Persecutions which the Jews of Palestina suffered under the Reign of Antiochus Epiphanés and his Successors The Book of Ecclesiasticus hath been written Originally in Hebrew by Jesus the Son of Syrac about the time of Ptolomy Philadelphus that is about 280. years before Jesus Christ and was Translated in Greek by the Grandson of Jesus the Son of Syrac under Ptolomy Euergetes Some dispute if that Ptolomy is the first or the second which is not very material since there is but a difference of 100. years R. Azaria de Rubeis in his Book Meor Enaiim ch 22. witnesseth that Ecclesiasticus is not rejected now by the Jews but is received among them with an unanimous consent and David Ganz saith that they put it in old times among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Hagiographes So in his Tsemac David ad A. 3448. The Book of Wisdom according to Grotius his Judgment is more ancient having been written in Hebrew under Simon the High-Priest who flourished under Ptolomeus Lagus Grotius thinks that the Greek Translation we have of that Book was made by some Christian who hath foisted into that Book many things which belong more to a Christian Writer than a Jew He raises such an accusation against the Translator of Ecclesiasticus But it is very easie to confute such a bold Conjecture First because that Book was in Chaldaick among the Jews till the Thirteenth Century as we see by Ramban in his Preface upon the Pentateuch and they never objected such an Interpolation but lookt upon it as a Book that was worthy of Salomon and probably his Works It was the Judgment of R. Azarias de Rubeis in the last Century Imre bina ch 57. The Epistle of Baruch and of Jeremy seem to Grotius the Writings of a Pious Jew who had a mind to exhort his People to avoid Idolatry And 't is very probable that it was Penned under the Persecutions of Antiochus when it was not sure to any to write in favour of the Jewish Religion under his own name The Book of Tobith seems to have been writ originally in Chaldaick and was among the Jews in St. Jerom's time who knowing not the Chaldaick Tongue called for a Jew to his assistance to render it into Hebrew that so he might render it in Latin as he saith in his Preface to Chromatius and Heliodorus Grotius supposes the Book to be very ancient Others believe but without any ground that it was Translated into Greek by the Seventy So that it would have been writ more than 250. years before Jesus Christ Whatsoever Conjecture we may form upon the Antiquity of it it is certain it was in great esteem among Christians in the second Century since we see that Clemens Alexandrinus and Irenaeus have followed his fancy of seven created Angels about the Throne of God and took that Doctrine for a Truth although we see no such Idea among the Jews who have the Translation of that Book but do not now consider it very much Grotius thinks that the Book of Judith contains not a true History but an Ingenious Comment of the Author who lived under Antiochus Epiphanés before the Profanation of the Temple by that Tyrant to exhort the Jewish Nation to expect a wonderful Deliverance from such a Tyranny which they groaned under And we see no reason to discard such a Conjecture although R. Azarias thinks Imre bina ch 51. that this History was alluded to in the Book of Esdras ch 4.15 He judges the same of the Additions to the Book of Daniel viz. the Prayer of Azaria the Song of the Three Children in the Furnace and of the History of Susanna he looks upon them as written by some Hellenist Jew So the Additions to the Book of Esther he judges to be the work of some Hellenist who invented the Story which were afterwards admitted among the Holy Writings because they were Pious and had nothing which could be lookt upon as contrary to the Jewish Religion Grotius saith nothing of the third and fourth of Esdras and hath not judged them fit to be Commented probably because they are not accounted in the Canon of the Church of Rome And indeed the fourth is only extant in Latin But after all a Man must have viewed the third with very little judgment who cannot perceive first that it is certainly the work of an ancient Jew before Jesus Christ his time 2ly That it was among the Jews as a Book of great Authority Josephus p. 362. follows the Authority of that third Book of Esdras in the History of Zorobabel We have not ancienter Writers than Clemens Alexandrinus St. Cyprian and St. Ambrose who have quoted the 4th Book of
among us I can add 4ly that they distinguish exactly the Angel of God from the Prophets although they are call'd by the same name of Angels or Messengers and they distinguish him from Angels which as creatures they exhort to praise God as in the Song of Azaria v. 36. O ye Angels of the Lord bless ye the Lord praise and exalt him above all for ever Such a distinction appears in the 1. of Esdras ch i. 50 51. Nevertheless the God of their Fathers sent by his Messenger to call them back because he spared them and his Tabernacle also But they had his Messengers in derision and look when the Lord spake unto them they made a sport of his Prophets So in Tobith ch v. 16. So they were well pleased Then said he to Tobias prepare thy self for the journey his father said Go thou with this man and God which dwelleth in heaven prosper your journey and the Angel of God keep you company Just according to the Prayer of Jacob Gen. 48.16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil bless the lads And that very Angel is called God by Jacob in the verse before So in Ecclus ch xvli 17. For in the division of the Nations of the whole earth he set a ruler over every people but Israel is the Lord's portion So in the Epistle of Jeremy v. 5 6. But say ye in your hearts O Lord we must worship thee For mine Angel is with you and I my self caring for your souls Where in the Greek that caring for their souls is referred to the same Angel So 2 Mac. xi 6. Now they that were with Maccabeus heard that he besieged the holds they and all the people with lamentation and tears besought the Lord that he would send a good Angel to deliver Israel To shew that the Jews before Jesus Christ had such a notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who was to save his people we must take notice of two things the first is that the Author of the three Books of Maccabees speaks of God at the end of his Book in the same terms which are used by Jacob Gen. xlviii 15 16. and are to be referred to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to a created Angel as I have explained it in a particular discussion of that very place of Genesis The second is that the Greek Interpreters of Scripture have used such method in translating some places of the Prophets which sheweth they understood that the Messias should be the very Angel of the Lord who is called the Counsellor and that the Angel of the Lord was the Lord himself Two examples will shew that clearly the first is in that famous Oracle of Isaiah ch ix 6. they have these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Angel of the Great Counsel whereas in the Hebrew it is said he shall be called the admirable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the very Word that the Angel of the Lord gives to himself Judg. xiii 18. the Counsellor of the mighty God and it is clear that they did understand these words of the Messias who is spoken of as the Son of David v. 7. in the same words which are used in Psalm lxxii The other example is in this other famous place of Isai lxiii 9. they have translated neither an Angel but himself saved them as if they had read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we read now Some of the new Jews are mightily intangled in explaining that place but it appears that these Interpreters of Isaiah look'd upon the face of God to have been God himself which is the reason of their translation and shews that they understood the face of the Lord which is so often spoken of by Moses to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is Jehovah I can add a reflection upon their Version of the 3d of Daniel v. 25. Species quarti similis filio Dei as saith Aquila a Jew who lived under Hadrian but the ancient Greeks had translated it similis Angelo Dei as saith an old Scholion related by Drusius in Fragmentis p. 1213. which shews that the ancient Hellenist had the same Notion of the Angel of God as of the Son of God But all those things shall be more cleared when we come to the authority of the other Jews which we are to produce Some perhaps may think that the Book of Ecclesiasticus supposeth the Wisdom which we maintain to be eternal to have been created and so saith that Author ch 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ch xxiv 9. But I take notice of three things 1. That such an Objection may be good in the mouth of an Arian but not at all in the mouth of a Socinian and much less in the mouth of an Unitarian of this Kingdom after their Writers have owned that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word of God signifies the essential vertue of God 2ly That the Author of Ecclesiasticus follows in that expression the very words of the Greek Version of Proverbs ch viii 22. in which it answers to the word possessed which is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3ly That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although we should suppose it to be the true reading hath a very large signification and indeed Aristobulus a Jew of Alexandria who lived about the same age of the Authors of those Apocryphal Books and whose words are quoted by Eusebius de Praep. Ev. L. vii § 14. p. 324. declares that the Wisdom which Solomon speaks of in the Book of Proverbs was before the Heaven and Earth and the very Author of Ecclesiasticus calls it positively eternal ch xxiv 18. There is another Objection which is backed by the authority of Grotius who by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Wisdom understands a created Angel but I shall shew afterwards the absurdity of that opinion of Grotius and his error is so plain that Mr. N. and the Unitarian Authors have been ashamed to follow his authority in this point daring not to maintain that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the first of St. John signified an Angel which they would have done if they could have digested the absurdity of Grotius his Notions upon that place of Wisdom ch xviii 15. As for the Holy Ghost that they acknowledged him for a Person and for a Divine one there is as much evidence from the same Apocryphal Books 1. I have noted they attributed to him the Creation of the World as you see in Judith ch xvi 14. Thou didst send forth thy Spirit and it created them which is an imitation of David's Notions Psal xxxiii 6. 2ly They call him the mouth of the Lord so in the 3d Book of Esdras ch i. 28. and 47 and 57. Howbeit Josias did not turn back his chariot from him but undertook to fight with him not regarding the words of the Prophet Jeremy spoken by the mouth of the Lord.
is a Book of no Authority but an Imposture of which you are the Father We Jews who are spread throughout all parts of the World and are intermingled among Christians of all Persuasions never yet met with these Books such as you now produce them to shew that Jesus is the Messias You tell us they were corrupted by the Christians of the second Age Produce Copies more ancient as Vouchers of this Truth The Books which you contend were falsified are of no Authority What other Books have you besides these falsified Books to prove there ever was such a Man as Jesus Christ who did and suffered what you tell us of Since you accuse these Books of Additions and defalcations and all sorts of corruption you have no solid proof for the matters in them which you say are true They who thus falsified the Scriptures by adding and substracting as they please or rather you your selves by advancing this Position have spoiled all use that might be made of these Books in Points controverted between us Thus much it is natural for a Jew of but an ordinary capacity to say and to quote his Tanchuma and all the Rabins who have disputed ever since there were Christians against the Gospel on the score of their attributing Divinity to Jesus Christ This Tanchuma is a famous Book among the Jews and has a passage in it in the Parascha va-elle Massahe which the Italian Inquisitors blot out of all those Books which the Jews Printed by Bomberg at Venice But this passage is still preserved and is to this effect that Jesus Christ whom they call wicked Balaam taught that he was God and on the contrary R. Tanchuma argues that he was a meer Man But should we call into the Dispute a Learned Jew that understands the Original and the meaning of his Prayers he would laugh in the face of a Socinian that should go about to persuade him that Jesus is not represented in the Gospels as God or that the Christians were not of this belief till after the 140th year after Christ And good reason for it The Learned Jews know well that the Prayer which in the Christian Countries is called the Prayer against the Sadducees and in other Countries the Prayer against the Minnim the Hereticks and Apostates was truly and originally written against the Christians for being Teachers of a Trinity and of Christ's Divinity and so as they judged destroyers of the Unity of the Godhead And this is R. Solomon's sense of that Prayer in his Notes on the Talmud The Jews otherwise know that this Prayer was composed under R. Gamaliâ—l who died A. D. 52. i. e. eighteen years before the Destruction of the Temple That this is no Fable of the Talmud which in more than one place * Talm. tr Berac ch c. Beth. Isr sect 69. does relate it they may evidently prove from Justin Martyr's Dialogue written A. D. 139. who mentions this Prayer or rather Curse against the Christians as already spread and received throughout all the Synagogues of the World Our Learned Jew deriding these Socinians would represent that he knew not how they could refuse Jesus Christ that Worship which the Christians ever since the first Preaching of the Gospel throughout the World have paid him on supposition of his being the true God He reads how his Ancestors saw him adored by the Christians in the first Century and he proves it to the Socinians from the Talmud * Sanhedr c. 4 in Gem. wherein are divers Relations of R. Eliezer the great Friend of R. Akiba who lived in the end of the first Century and the beginning of the second Century concerning the Gospels and the Publick Worship rendred to Jesus Christ by the Christians In a word any Jew who has sense enough to reflect on it may see that the Gospel proposes Jesus Christ as the Object of Christian Worship And not to mention now their other prejudices The single prejudice which will be taken against such a Socinian Novel-Gospel will tend more to make them disesteem the Gospel and reject it altogether than it will dispose them to attend to the Arguments of a Socinian drawn thence in behalf of Christianity These things I leave to the consideration of our Socinians For other Christians they see whither the Socinian Methods of treating Scripture lead and cannot but behold with sorrow the wounds they give to the Christian Religion under pretence of making it more apt to gain the Jews but in truth making it so ridiculous to Men of any ordinary capacity that we cannot wonder at their not having after all their boasts converted so much as one Jew to the Christian Faith FINIS A Dissertation concerning the Angel who is called the Redeemer Gen. XLVIII SIR YOU do very truly observe that the Subject of our last but short Conversation is a matter of the greatest moment and deserving the utmost care in the discussion of it When mention was there made of the Angel whose Blessing Jacob prayed might descend on the Sons of Joseph I then asserted he was not other than the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word You were not then very forward to embrace this Notion being carried away with the Authority of some great Names and especially of Grotius who understand this Angel in Jacob's Prayer to be only a created Angel But having not time to hear the Grounds of my Assertion you were desirous I should put them with what perspicuity I could into writing in hopes that the same Arguments if they should prove cogent to bring you over to my opinion might be of use to others who were in the same Sentiments with your self So good an end being proposed I set my self without delay to your commands and having digested my thoughts in this Paper I now send them to you intreating you to judge of them as you are wont of the Labours of your Friend with all impartiality and humanity still remembring that I made it only my care to express my thoughts clearly and to find out the truth and to deliver it simply according to the best of my understanding And so I come to the Question in hand SECT I. Moses having related how Joseph took his two Sons along with him to Jacob his Father that lay sick in order to obtain his Blessing on them before he died goes on to give us the form in which he Blessed them Gen. xlviii 15 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Words are thus rendred by the Greek Interpreters commonly called the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And in the Vulgar Latin Version Benedixitque Jacob filiis Josephi ait Deus in cujus conspectu ambulaverunt patres mei Abraham Isaac Deus qui pascit me ab adolescentia mea usque in praesentem diem Angelus qui eruit me de cunctis malis benedicat pueris istis invocetur super eos nomen meum nomina quoque patrum
and forced sense on them But with what face the Mahometans can object this I know not when they themselves do so grosly pervert the passages in Deut. xxxiii 33. Hab. iii. 3. Deut. xviii and xxxiv in favour of Mahomet and his Law and in favour of Mahomet only many Texts in Isaiah Ezekiel Zephany and other Prophets as you may see them alledged by Hazzadaula in his Fourth Book but especially when they urge all those places in St. John's Gospel where the Paraclete is spoken of as so many Promises of Mahomet's coming I must confess some warm indiscreet Mahometans in dispute with the Christians have given them occasion to believe that the Mahometans generally accused the Christians with falsifying their Scriptures Just as the petty Controvertists of the Church of Rome have impudently averred the Scripture to be corrupt in many places the better to establish their Church's Authority And thus we find Ahmed the Mahometan charging both Jews and Christians with altering of their Bibles Hotting Hist p. 364. But as there are in the Roman Church Men wiser and calmer that see the consequences of so rash an Accusation and have therefore proved unanswerably the Integrity of the Sacred Text so are there among the Mahometans more wary and cautious Disputants who despise and disallow those false Charges advanced by some of their party against the Jews and Christians Such a one was Hazzadaula in the Book before cited who solidly proves that by the care the Masorite Jews took to ascertain the Text of the Old Testament it was impossible they should be willing to corrupt it and that if they had been willing yet they were divided into so many Sects of unreconcileable hatred to one another as rendred it impossible for them to do it He then shews that the difference which is between the several Versions as between the Seventy and Syriack for Example was no prejudice to the Purity of the Text it self but that this arose from the several Views the Interpreters then had from the different Notions and senses they affixed to the Original words He then passes to the Examination of the various Readings which our Unitarians triumph in and shews that neither their number nor variety ought to diminish the Authority of the Originals He gives Reasons for his preference of the Jewish Bible to that of the Samaritans He proves the corruption of the Books of the Old Testament could not be made before Jesus Christ's time since he never reproached them for it which he would certainly have done had they been guilty of it nor could the corruption come in after Christ's time because the Jews and Christians who are such mortal Enemies have had these Books in keeping and daily read them though they interpret them very differently In a word we cannot easily meet with a more perfect Treatise on this Subject nor one more proper to refute the bold insinuations of some who under the name of Christians and Men skilled in Critical knowledg have undertaken to shake the Foundations of the Christian Religion and for this purpose would discredit the Authority of the Holy Scripture under the disguise of making it rest on the Authority of Tradition The Reader will I hope reflect on what I have said concerning the conduct of the Socinians in their Disputes with us relating to the Divinity of Christ To which I may add that some of them less modest though more sincere than Socinus being convinced that no Answer could be given to the Quotations from the Old Testament that were used in Proof of our Lord's Divinity thought fit to reject the Epistle to the Hebrews which contains those Quotations as an Apocryphal Piece This Enjedinus has done and thought it a quick way to deliver himself at once of many difficulties from which otherwise he could not extricate himself For had he believed Socinus's Answers Satisfactory he had never betaken himself to this last and desperate shift Others of whom Mr. N. is one do suppose that whatever makes for the advantage of the Trinitarians Cause is all forged And so they abandon the fanciful Explications Socinus has given of the first Chapter of St. John's Gospel as having no need of them so long as they can make one believe that the Trinitarians have foisted into the New Testament whatever they pleased This is still a shorter answer than the former The first rendred one particular Book only useless to the Trinitarians but this makes all those Books of the New Testament useless from whence any Objection may be drawn against the Unitarians What end the Socinians have in these dangerous attempts whether to facilitate the Conversion of the Jews as they pretend or to do service to the Atheists and Deists as it seems to be their real design is worthy every Christian 's serious enquiry If they intend the Conversion of the Jews we may well demand of them what way they will take to effect it Smalcius one of their chief Writers has affirmed that the Books of the Old Testament are of little use to convert the Jews De Div. Chr. c. x. already quoted His reason is because if we interpret any Text in the Old Testament of Jesus Christ we must interpret it Mystically that is according to quite another sense than that which the words do naturally import And now admitting this to be true what use can a Socinian make of the Old Testament against the Jews Sommerus and Francis David whose Opinions as to the denial of the Worship of Jesus Christ are embraced by Mr. N. being forced to own that the Author of the Book of Proverbs did ascribe a Son to God ch xxx 4. and yet being not willing to acknowledg it as a truth took the readiest way to defeat the Authority of this Book and placed it among the Apocryphal Writings One should wonder how such Socinians are like to be Converters who call the Jews Canon of the Scriptures into question and consequently leave no Books from whence as from a common Principle they may on each side deduce their reasonings As for the Books of the New Testament what use can they make of them Yes very great saith the Socinian If the Books of the New Testament were reformed and those Patches intirely taken from them which were never written by the Apostles though added under their Names such as the Epistle to the Hebrews which was brought in after the year 140. of Christ and stuffed with Doctrines of a Trinity and Christ's Divinity contrary to the Faith of Jesus Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians then we might hope to have success in the Conversion of the Jews But in truth they are not likely to succeed with their reformed Socinian Gospel so well as they would have us believe For 't is reasonable to think that every Jew of common sense would retort the Book on themselves and tell them frankly This is not the Christians Gospel from whence you offer to convince me this