is mentioned This is he of whom it is said and God called Moses out of the Bush He is called an Angel because he Governs the World for it is written in one place And Jehovah that is the Lord God brought us out of Egypt and in another place He sent his Angel and brought us out of Egypt And again The Angel of his Presence saved them viz. that Angel who is the face of God of whom it is said My face shall go before you Lastly that Angel of whom the Prophet Malachi mentions And the Lord whom you seek shall suddenly come to his Temple even the Angel of the Covenant whom you desire At length he adds The face of God is God himself as all Interpreters do acknowledge but no one can rightly understand this without being instructed in the Mysteries of the Law R. Menachem of Rekan on Gen. xlviii 16. the same that afterwards commented on the whole Pentateuch was no stranger to this Notion Saith he He means the Shekinah when he speaks of the Redeeming Angel f. 52. See also f. 55. The like has R. Bechai the famous Jewish Writer whose Comments are constantly in the hands of the Jewish Doctors He proves that this Blessing is not different from that which is afterwards repeated Gen. xlix where no Angel is mentioned Whence it follows that the three terms in Gen. xlviii God God that fed me the Angel that redeemed me are Synonimous to the mighty one of Jacob Ch. xlix which Title the Jews in their Prayers do frequently ascribe to God Bech f. 71. c. 4. Ed. Rivae di Trento He also there teaches that this Angel was the Shekinah As does R. Joseph Gekatilia in his Book called Saare Ora according to Menasseh Ben Israel q. 64. in Gen. p. 118. Aben Sueb on this place a Man of Name among his Party writes much to the same purpose on this place These are followed by two Eminent Authors of the Cabalists The one in his Notes on Zohar f. 122. toward the end saith the Angel that delivered me from all evil is the Shekinah of whom Exod. xiv 19. And the Angel of the Lord which went before the camp of Israel removed and went behind them and may God bless us in the age to come The other is he who contracted the Zohar on Genesis and is called R. David the less He in that Book Ed. Thessalonic f. 174. professes to follow the opinion of R. Gekatalia in his Saare Ora. Nor does Menasseh Ben Israel himself much dissent from these in the above-mentioned place For though he attempts to reconcile Gen. xxviii 16. with the first Commandment Exod. xx Thou shalt have no other Gods before me by saying it was the opinion of several of their Masters that there was no contradiction between them yet at length he produces the opinion of the Cabalists for the satisfaction of his Readers who possibly would not acquiesce in his former reason drawn only from Modern Authorities I mention not R. Levi ben Gersom's opinion who denies the Angel here spoken of to be a Creature but calls him the Intellectus Agens because he seems to have borrowed the Notion from the Arabian Philosophers nor is it commonly received by those of his Religion Many others might be added to these Jewish Testimonies but what I have already produced is I think very sufficient SECT V. Having thus shewed the Opinions of the ancient Jews concerning Jacob's Angel and that to this day the Tradition is not quite worn out that exalts him above a created Angel I now proceed to the third Question the clearing of which will fully justifie that Opinion of the Ancients concerning this Text. And that is Whether this form of Blessing be not an express Prayer The soundest and most part as well of Jews as Christians do agree That we can't worship Angels without Idolatry This Maimonides affirms as I quoted him above and the Protestants as all Men know do abhor this Idolatry in the Roman Church I do therefore positively assert That these words contain a Prayer to the Angel as well as to God for a Blessing on his Children This the Jews can't gain-say since Jonathan their Paraphrast and other Writers after him do commonly term this Blessing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a Prayer And for this reason R. Menasseh thought it necessary to endeavour to reconcile this Prayer of Jacob with the first Commandment which forbids Angel-Worship according to the Jews Interpretation R. Menach de Rek in Pent. f. 97. c. 4. It is true Jacob's form of Blessing does seem to proceed from him either as a Wish or a Prophecy A Wish as if he had said Would to the Lord God and his Angel would bless the Lads A Prophecy as if he had foretold that God and his Angel should in after-times fulfill what he now wished But it might be both Wish and Prophecy and notwithstanding be a direct Prayer to God and the Redeeming Angel 'T is well known how the Jews commonly delivered their Petitions to God in this form And yet I can't forbear giving one instance to confirm it You may read it in Deut. vi 22 c. And the Lord said to Moses saying Speak to Aaron and his Sons thus shall you bless the children of Israel and say The Lord bless thee and keep thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace And they shall invoke my name for the children of Israel so our Translation is to be mended and I will bless them So that in plain terms the form of Blessing here prescribed by God is called Invocation I cannot therefore see what should hinder but that we after Jacob's example may offer up our Prayers to a created Angel supposing as some do that Jacob prayed for a Blessing to such a kind of Angel De Sanct. Beat. l. 1. c. 29. Corn. A Lap. on Gen. xlviii It is a necessary consequence that Bellarmine and others of his Communion draw from this instance Holy Jacob invoked an Angel therefore it is not unlawful for the pretended reformed to do the like therefore one may worship others besides God these things saith he cannot be denied unless you reckon Prayer to be no act of Worship not peculiar to God alone But let them of his Church get out of these difficulties as they can who believe Jacob's Angel to have been a meer Creature Let them try how they can convince a Socinian from Ephes i. 2. and other places of Scripture where Worship is ascribed to Christ The Socinian has his answer ready he may wish and pray to Christ for Grace though he be not God since he does no more than Jacob did when he prayed for a Blessing on his Children to a meer Angel I am more concerned for these Divines of the Reformed Church who have given the same Interpretation of Jacob's Angel
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.
In the beginning saith he Bara Elohim the Gods created Gen. i. 1. He might have said Jehovah Bara Jehovah being the proper name by which God made himself know to Moses and by him to his People Ixod iii. 15. or he might have said Eloah Bara and so he had joyned the Singular Number of Elohim which signifies God with the Verb Bara which is also the Singular Number and signifies created But Moses uses the Plural word Elohim with a Verb of the Singular Number and he repeats it thirty times in the History of the Creation only although this word denotes a Plurality in the Divine Nature and not one single Person Had Moses joyned always the Noun Elohim which is Plural with a Verb or Adjective in the Singular we might have judged that by calling God by a name in the Plural he had followed the corrupt custom which then obtained among the Heathens of speaking of the Gods in the Plural and that he designed to rectifie it by expressing the single action of God by a Singular Verb or Adjective But here this Excuse will not serve for 1. he had the word Eloah God in the Singular which he uses Deut. xxxii 15 17. and in other places He had also several other Names of God which he uses in other places all of them Singular and consequently any of them had been fitter for his use to root out Polytheism 2. Moses himself sometimes joyns the Noun Elohim with Verbs and Adjectives in the Plural There are several examples of this in his Books and more in the other Sacred Writers that imitated him in it you may see it in Gen. xx 13. xxxv 7. Job xxxv 10. Jos xxiv 19. Psal cxlix 1. Eccles xii 3. 1 Sam. vii 23. Es liv 5. which shews the impudence of Abarbanel who to elude the force of this Argument maintains that the word Elohim is a Singular In Pent. fol. 6. col 3. 6. Another Reflection on the Stile of Moses which ought to be every where Singular and yet intimates a Plurality is this That Moses in the History of the Creation brings in God speaking to some one thus Let such a thing be made and it follows it was made and again God said and God said This expression is repeated no less than eight times within the compass of one Chapter which is a thing very surprizing in so concise an History For to whom did God then speak to whom did he issue out his Orders or who was he that did execute them There were then neither Men nor Angels to obey him nor to hear him speak 3. There is no one that reads the account of Man's Creation but if he considers what he reads is struck with these words of God Gen. i. 26. Let Us make man after our Image and likeness These words in the Plural Number denote plainly a Plurality Let US make and OUR Image are too lively Characters of Plurality to be passed over without particular regard 4. We may make the same reflection on those words Gen. iii. 5. which point out a Plurality of Persons And you shall be as Gods and a little after Adam is become as one of Us ver 22. We find a like example Gen. xi 7. where God saith Let Us go down and confound their Language Again Gen. xx 13. When God caused me to wander from my Father's house the Hebrew is when the Gods caused me to wander Again Gen. xxxv 7. Jacob built an Altar and called the place El-Bethel because there God or Gods as it is in Hebrew appeared unto him All this is contained within one Book only that of Genesis We meet with the same Notion in these words of Deuteronomy ch iv 7. Who have the Gods so nigh unto them We may trace the Idea of Plurality still further in the following Books as in Joshua xxiv 19. And Joshua said You cannot serve the Lord for he is an holy God where in the Hebrew it is the Holy Gods So Solomon Prov. xxx 3. I neither learned wisdom nor have the knowledg of the Holies instead of the Holy And Eccl. xii 1. Remember thy Creators Upon the whole we should remark 1. That this Plurality is expressed in several passages of the Old Testament and not in one place only 2. That there is no kind of speaking by which a Plurality in God may be signified but is used in the Old Testament A Plural is joyned with a Verb Singular Gen. i. 1. In the beginning the Gods created Heaven and Earth A Plural is joyned with a Verb Plural Gen. xxxv 7 And Jacob called the name of the place Beth-El because the Gods there appeared to him A Plural is joyned with an Adjective Plural Jos xxiv 19. You cannot serve the Lord for he is the holy Gods 2 Sam vii 23 What one nation in the earth is like thy people like Israel whom the Gods went to redeem for a people to himself So Eccles v. 8. There be higher than they Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which stands for Gods God being called the Most High And in Eccles xii 1. Remember thy Creators in the days of thy Youth In conformity to which manner of speaking Isaiah says ch liv 5. For thy Makers are thy Husbands the Lord of Hosts is his name A Verb in the Plural is joyned with a name in the Singular as you read Eccles ii 12. as it has been observed by R. Bachaie in Parash bresch fol. 11. col 2. of the Edit in fol. from which he infers that God and the house of his Judgment are expressed there for by the King which is there spoken of he doth not understand Solomon but God as they do in the Targum upon 1 Chron. iv 23. which hath been followed by R. Bachaje Ibid. fol. 11. col 3. and by Lombroso in his Heb. Bible you have the same remark of St. Jerome upon Jer. xxiii 36. when you read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Living Gods and from which he draws an argument for the Doctrine of the Trinity 3. That though there is but one only Jehovah yet in the Holy Scripture we meet with several Elohim to whom the Title of Jehovah is given this we see in a hundred places in the Law where the words are Jehovah Eloheka i. e. the Lord thy Gods which does certainly deserve to be considered This also we more particularly see in the History of the destruction of Sodom Gen. 30.24 where it is written That Jehovah rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Jehovah out of Heaven There is Jehovah and Jehovah and if they do not make two I know not what will express a Plurality But we shall have more to say of this afterwards I have given in short some Marks of a Plurality in the Divine Nature which may be gathered out of the Writings of the Old Testament For the fuller satisfaction of my Reader I am next to shew that the ancient Jews made the same Reflections and
in the Old Testament and to shew who they are I need not prove it of the Father since it will not be denied that he is called God by them that will deny it of any other But I shall shew that sometimes the Son is called so whether by that name of the Son or of the Word or some other name without mention of the Spirit Next I shall shew that the Spirit is spoken of as God even he is mentioned without the Son And lastly That the Father the Son and the Spirit are all Three mentioned as God and all Three spoken of together in some Texts of the Old Testament Scriptures To keep to this order I am first to shew that there is some kind of Intimation of a Trinity in places where God is spoken of in these Scriptures I shall name but two or three Texts of many for I call it but an Intimation and it may amount to thus much that we find the Name of God repeated three times over for it was certainly no vain Repetition Thus in the Blessing of Israel Numb vi 24 25 26. The Lord bless thee and keep thee The Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace So Isa xxxiii 22. The Lord is our judge the Lord is our lawgiver the Lord is our king he will save us So Dan. ix 19. O Lord hear O Lord forgive O Lord hearken and do defer not for thy own sake O God The like Intimation we find in those words of the Prophet Isaiah which do both shew a Plurality in the Divine Nature and restrain it to a Trinity Isa vi 3. The Prophet heard the Seraphims cry one to another Holy Holy Holy Lord God of hosts These are Titles which taken together can belong to no one but God and the Repetition of them shews something in it which cannot but seem Mysterious especially to any one that considers those other words of God speaking in the same Chapter ver 8. Who will go for us words which clearly note a Plurality of Persons as also in Hos xii 4 5. and in some other places To shew who these are we must consider those places of the Old Testament where the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinctly spoken of as several Persons The Son is expresly spoken of by David who himself was a Type of the Messias and is so acknowledged by the Jews Psal ii 7. The Lord said unto me Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as has been already proved is called Wisdom according to the Jewish Notions is the Son of God by Eternal Generation himself sheweth Prov. viii 23 24. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting from the beginning or ever the Earth was when there were no depths I was brought forth So in Prov. xxx 4. Who hath established all the ends of the earth What is his name or what is his Son's name The Son can be understood of no other than of that Eternal Wisdom that assisted in the Creation as was before mentioned Elsewhere the Son or the Word is spoken of according to the Jewish Expositions of such Texts where he is not named and yet he is called God and Lord as Psal xlv 7. O God thy God hath anointed thee And Psal cx 1. The Lord said unto my Lord Sit thou on my right hand till I make thy enemies thy footstool It was the same Son who appeared oftentimes under the Character of the Angel of the Lord though he was not a Created Angel but the Lord Jehovah himself This I only mention here being to treat of it largely in some of the following Chapters That the Spirit is spoken of as a Person in Scripture none can be ignorant of that reads but the beginning of Genesis where in the 2d Verse he is named the Spirit of God and said to have his part in the Work of the Creation The Jews could not make this Spirit to be an Angel because they all agree the Angels were not yet created when the Spirit moved upon the face of the Waters Nor was the Spirit of God a mighty Wind as some render it in that place for as yet there was no Air much less Exhalations till this Work was past But that Moses meant a Person sufficiently appears by that which followeth Gen. vi 3. Where God saith My Spirit shall not alway strive with man It was the Holy Spirit of God that inspired the holy Patriarchs to give those Admonitions and Warnings to the wicked World of Mankind before the Flood by which he strove to bring them to Repentance It was the same Divine Spirit whose Operations the Israelites were sensible of in his inspiring the Seventy Elders Numb xi 25 26. The Psalmist no doubt thought of those words of Moses in the beginning of Genesis when he said in speaking of the Works of the Creation Psal xxxiii 6. All the hosts of them were made by the Spirit of his mouth and this Spirit he sensibly knew to be a Person for thus he saith of himself 2 Sam. xxiii 2 3. The Spirit of the Lord spake by me and his Word was in my tongue Lastly In some places of the Old Testament there are plainly Three Persons spoken of together and especially in the beginning of Genesis where it ought to be remembred that the word Elohim Gods does naturally import a Plurality R. Bechai in Gen. chap. i. 1. and others quoted in the former Chapter Now there can be no Plural of less than Two in number and therefore at least God the Father and the Word are to be understood in the first Verse the second Verse adds the Spirit of God as it has been just now mentioned And it is very natural to think that God spake to these Two the Word and the Spirit in Verse 26. of that Chapter when he said Let Us make man after Our Image as also afterward Gen. iii. 22. Behold the man is become as one of Us And again speaking of the Builders of Babel Gen. ix 7. Let Us go down and confound their Language This must be to Two at least for had he spoke to One only he would have said in the Singular Number Come thou and let us confound their language The manner of speaking plainly imports a Plurality and they could be no other than those Three which were spoken of in the first Chapter As Moses brings in these Three Persons into his History of the first Creation so does the Evangelical Prophet in speaking of the Mission of Christ Isa xi 1 2 c. The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him i. e. upon the Messias according to the received Opinion of the Jews Isa xlviii 16. The Lord hath sent Me and his Spirit Again Isa lix 19 20 21. When the enemy shall
come in like a flood the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him and the Redeemer shall come unto Sion Again Isa lxi 1. The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon Me because the Lord hath anointed me They are the words which Christ applied to himself Luke iv 18. It may not be amiss here to answer an Objection against the use that we have made of those Texts wherein God saith WE and US in the Plural which manner of speaking the Jews cannot but see does denote a Plurality R. Kimchi on Isa vi 8. makes that Observation But then he fancies it is spoken with relation to Angels whom God is pleased to call in by way of Consultation In the Text Isa vi those whom God consults with are to send as well as he and those in Gen. i. 26. are to make Man as well as he And surely God would not join the Angels with himself in the sending of his Prophets much less would he give Angels a share in the Glory of making Man the Master-piece of the Creation Angels are Creatures as well as Man and were but a Day elder than he according to some of the Jews a Week older than he they could not be And at the making of Man it is believed with very good reason that those Angels were not yet fallen whom we now call Devils It seems not very likely that as soon as they were made God should call them into Council for making of another of his Creatures much less that he should make them Creators together with himself especially when this gives them a Title to the Worship of Intelligent Beings such as Man who if this had been true ought to have worshipp'd not only Angels but Devils as being his Creators together with God But the Truth is so far on the contrary that as at first Man was made but a little lower than the Angels so there is a Man since made Lord both of Angels and Devils whom they are to worship This I know our Unitarians will now deny But to come to an end of this matter It is certainly below the Infinite Majesty of God in any of his works whatever to say to any of his Creatures Let us make or Let us do this or that And for that idle Fancy of a Consultation it is not only absurd in it self but it is contrary to the holy Scripture that asks Isa xl 13. Who has directed the Spirit of the Lord or who hath been his Counsellor Which in effect is a flat denial that there is any Creature to be call'd into Consultation with God And therefore whoever they were to whom God said this Let us make or Let us do this or that they could be no Creatures they must be uncreated Beings like himself if there were any such then in being But that then at the Creation such there were even the Word and the Spirit has been shewn from the beginning of that History I think beyond contradiction Thus we have collected a number of Places from the Old Testament which speak of a Trinity and consequently do reduce the Plurality which we proved before to a Trinity in the Unity of the Divine Nature We see there Three distinct Characters of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit We see the Generation of the Son express'd and the Mission of the Holy Spirit upon the Son when he came to live in our Nature We see the number Three still observed in begging Pardon of Sins of Blessings and in returning Praises to God intimating there were Three from whom all good things come and who are therefore the Objects of Prayer It remains that we enquire whether the like Inferences which we draw from these Texts were made by the Jews before Jesus Christ which is the second Particular of our proposed Method I shall not repeat here what in the preceding Chapters I proved That both Philo and the Chaldee Paraphrasts had such Notions of the Unity of God as were not repugnant to his Plurality The Reader can't have forgotten already a thing of such importance My business now is to shew that the Ancient Jews plainly own Two Powers in God which they distinguish from God and yet call each of them God the one being the Son of God the other the Holy Spirit who is called the Spirit of God Notwithstanding that I take the Chaldee Paraphrasts to be ancienter than Philo yet I chuse to begin with Philo's Testimonies rather than theirs for three Reasons First Because he writ in the way of Treatises and therefore much larger and clearer than they did that writ only in the way of Translation or Paraphrase adding nothing of their own but only sometimes a very short Note on the Text And therefore their Writings are much likelier to be explained by his than his by theirs 2dly Because the Passages in Philo for the Existence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Person coeternal with the Father are so evident as to leave the Socinians no other way of answering them but to deny with Mr. N. that the Books that contain them were written by Philo the Jew 3dly A third Reason is because these Passages of Philo being written at Alexandria and abounding with Expressions used by the Apostles when they speak of Jesus Christ as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will contribute to explain some of the Quotations we shall take out of the Paraphrases in use at Babylon and Jerusalem These three great Cities Babylon Jerusalem and Alexandria were the three great Academies of the Jews till the destruction of the Temple under Vespasian So that whatever was received among the Jews in these three Cities before our Saviour's time may well pass for the Opinion of the Jewish Church at that time Let us proceed then to some of those Passages in Philo the Jew wherein he declares that there are Two such Powers in God as we call Two Persons and no one shall make sense of those Passages that calls them otherwise 1. In general he acknowledges that God hath Two Chief Supreme Powers one of which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord. De Abrah p. 286 287. F. De vit Mos iii. p. 517. F. 2. That these Two Powers are Uncreated Quod Deus sit immut p. 238. A. Eternal De Plant. Noae 176. D. and Infinite or Immense and Incomprehensible De Sacr. Ab. p. 168. B. 3. On many occasions he speaks of these Two Powers as De Cherub p. 86. F. G. 87. A. De Sacr. Ab. p. 108. A. B. De Plant. Noae p. 176. D. E. Quod Deus est immut p. 229. B. De Confus Ling. p. 270. E. 271. Lib. de Prof. p. 359. G. and especially p. 362 and p. 363. B. C. D. Quis rerum divin Haer. p. 393. G. p. 394. A. C. De Somn. p. 457. F. De Monar p. 631. A. B. C. De Vict. Offeren p. 661. B. De Mund. p. 888. B. 4.
In particular Though he doth not directly name these Two Powers yet it is clear that by the first he means the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he saith it is the Power by which all things are created or to which God spoke when he made Man Which two Characters are ascribed to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Philo in many of his Tracts The other which we call the Holy Spirit is often acknowledged by Philo Lib. Quod Deus sit immut p. 229. B. 5. These things being considered he saith it appears how God is Three and yet he is but One He sheweth how this was represented in that Vision to Abraham Gen. xviii where it is said Verse 1. That Jehovah appeared to him And Verse 2. Abraham looked and behold Three men stood by him Yet he spoke but to One Vers 3. saying My Lord if now I have found favour in thy sight pass not away I pray thee from thy servant c. This Vision according to the Literal Sense he expounds of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Two Angels as I have quoted him elsewhere * V. Phil. All. 11. p. 77. E. But he saith here was also a Mystery that lay under this Literal Sense like to Sarah's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the LXX calleth the Cakes that were hid under the Embers According to this Mystical Sense he saith here was denoted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Great Jehovah with his Two 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which one is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are Philo's words De Sacrif Ab. Cain p. 108. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God attended with his Two Supreme Powers Principality and Goodness being himself but One in the middle of these Two makes these Three Appearances to the seeing Soul which is represented by Abraham That these words did not drop from Philo by chance the Reader may see in another place where he speaks purposely of this matter De Abrahamo p. 287. E. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. In the middle is the Father of all things on each side of him are the Two Powers the oldest and the nearest to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Jehovah whereof one is the Creative Power the other is the Royal Power The Creative Power is called God the Royal Power is called Lord. He therefore in the middle being attended by these Powers on each side of him represents to the seeing Faculty the appearance of sometimes One and sometimes of Three Philo after all warns his Reader that this is a Mystery not to be communicated to every one but only to them that were capable to understand and to keep it to themselves By which he sheweth that this was kept as a Cabala among the Jewish Doctors for fear if it came out the People might misunderstand it and thereby fall into Polytheism As for the Targums they likewise are very clear in this matter For besides the Lord Jehova without any addition they speak of the Word of the Lord or the Shekinah of the Lord and that so often that it will be endless to quote all the places some of them however must be cited to put the thing out of dispute 1. Where ever the words Jehovah and Elohim are read in the Hebrew There Onkelos commonly renders it in his Chaldee Paraphrase the Word of the Lord as Gen. xxviii 20 21. xxxi 49. Ex. ii 25. xvi 8. xix 17. xxxii 20. Lev xx 23. xxvi 49. Numb xi 20. xiv 9. xxiii 21. Deut. i. 30 32. ii 7. iii. 12. iv 24 27. v. 5. ix 3. xx 1. xxxi 6 8. The Targums commonly describe the same Person under the Title of Shekinah which signifies the Divine Habitation The Origin of that expression is in the Hebrew word which we find in Gen. ix 27. and is repeated in many places of the Old Testament I acknowledg freely that in some few places of the Targums it seems to be employed to express the Holy Ghost so that Eliah in his Dictionary and some others who have followed him and transcribed his Book in their Lexicons takes the Shekinah and the Holy Ghost to be the same But after all I believe that Eliah hath been mistaken by not being fully acquainted with the Ideas of the most learned of his people And indeed we see that the most famous Writers of the Synagogue put quite another sense upon the Targums and decide that question against Eliah looking upon the Memra and the Shekinah as the same So doth R. Moses Maimonides R. Menachem de Rakanaty and Ramban and R. Bachaye It is very easie to be satisfied that these famous Authors are in the right For if you consider the places where Philo the Jew speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you shall see that they are in the Targum explained either by the Memra da Jehova or by the Shekinah And on the contrary if you except very few places you shall find that the Targums employ the term of Holy Ghost as the proper name which we have in the Original And even to this day the Jews do oftner call the Spirit as by his proper name Ruach hakkodesh the Holy Spirit That the Targumists had the same Notions of these two that Philo had is I think plain if we compare what Philo saith of the two Powers of God De Plant. Noae p. 172. whereof as we shewed before he hath one on each side of himself with what we read of the two Hands of God in Jonathan and the Jerusalem Targum on Ex. xv 17. The like expressions are to be found in other places too many to be here collected but we shall consider them afterwards The mean while we cannot but take notice how that Doctrine of the Trinity past current among the Jews of the ancient Synagogue though they were as zealous Asserters of the Unity of the Godhead as our Socinians can pretend to be at this day No doubt the ancient Jews could have found as many Contradictions in these two Doctrines of Trinity and Unity as the Socinians do if they had not been more disposed to study how to reconcile them together being satisfied that both these Doctrines were part of the Revelation which God had made to their Fathers We cannot say so altogether of the Modern Jews who are very much alienated from the Doctrine of the Trinity by seeing much clearer Revelations of it in the New Testament and especially since they are treated with disputes against the Christians that make Christ to be the Messias or second Person in the Trinity which they can by no means endure now to hear This has set them to hunt for ways to avoid the Evidence of these Texts that speak of a Plurality in the Divine Nature and in this pursuit they forsake their ancient Guides and strangely intangle themselves and contradict one another Some of them flatly deny that any of those Plural words do denote any Plurality in God but
he may be the meaning of this It seems that Moses should have said Who have God so near them But saith he there is a Superior God and there is the God who was the Fear of Isaac and there is an Inferior God and therefore Moses saith The Gods so near For there are many Virtues that come from the only One and all they are one See how the same Author supposes that there are Three Degrees in the Godhead in Levit. col 116. Come and see the Mystery in the word Elohim viz. There are Three degrees and every degree is distinct by himself and notwithstanding they are all One and tied in One and one is not separated from the other And again in Exod. col 75. Upon the words of Deut vi 4. Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord they must know that those Three viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are One unum and that is a Secret which we learn in the Mystery of the Voice which is heard The Voice is One unum but it contains Three Modes viz. the Fire the Air and the Water Now these Three are One in the Mystery of the Voice and they are but One unum So in this place Jehovah our Lord Jehovah are one unum You have this Remark of the same Author in Gen. fol. 54. col 2. de Litera ש That the Three Branches of that Letter denote the Heavenly Fathers who are there named Jehovah our Lord Jehovah R. Hay Hagahon who lived Seven hundred Years ago said there are Three Lights in God the Ancient Light or Kadmon the Pure Light or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Purified Light or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that these make but One God And that there is neither Plurality nor Polytheism in this The same Idea is followed by R. Shem Tov in his Book Emunoth part 4. cap. 8. p. 32. col 2. See again R. Hamay Hagaon in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Speculation cited by Reuchlin p. 651. Hi tres qui sunt unum inter se proportionem habent ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unum uniens unitum He said before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sunt principium medium finis haec sunt unus punctus est dominus universi R. Joseph ben Gekatilia and the other Cabalists are in effect for three Elohims when they treat of the three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or three first Sephiroth For they agree that the three first Sephiroth were never seen by any body and that there is no discord no imperfection among them The Note of this R. Joseph Gekatilia is very remarkable The Jews saith he have been under the severity of judgment and shall continue so till the coming of the Messias who shall be united saith he with the second Sephirah which is Wisdom according as it is written Isa xi 2. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him the Spirit of Wisdom c. And he shall cause the Spirit of Grace and Clemency to descend from the first Sephirah who is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Infinite and he follows in that Rabbi Salomon Jarchi who saith upon Isa xi that the Cochma which is the second Sephira shall be in the middle of the Messias In a word this Notion of Plurality and Trinity expressed in the Writings of Moses and the Prophets hath not only been observed by the Jews but they have found and acknowledged it as well as the Christians to be a great and profound mystery And for the explaining of it the Jews have employed very near the same Ideas that the Christians use in speaking of the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity For they conceive in God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faces and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistences which we call Persons as one may see in Sepher Jetzirah Moreover we may observe 1. That when they speak of the three first Sephiroth they understand the same thing by them as we do by three Personalities three Modes of Existence active or passive Emanations or Processions which are the foundation of the Personalities 2ly That though they hold ten Sephiroth in all yet they make a great difference between the three first Sephiroth and the seven last For they regard the first as Persons but the last as Attributes according to which God acts in the ordinary course of his Providence or according to his several dispensations towards his Creatures Hence they call the seven last Middoth or Measures that is to say the Attributes and Characters which are visible in the Works of God namely his Justice and Mercy c. And this is confessed in plain words by the great Cabalist R. Menachem de Rekanati Tres primariae numerationes quae sunt intellectuales non vocantur mensurae i.e. they are not Attributes as are the seven last which he explains under that Notion Rittangel hath already quoted that place in his Notes upon Sepher Jetzira p. 193. It may be objected that the ancient Jews were ignorant of the Names of Father Son and Holy Spirit which Names the Christians give to the three Persons in the Deity But this if it were true would not weigh much with a reasonable mind For who can doubt but a new Revelation may distinguish those Notions clearly by proper and suitable Names which the Jews by what Revelation they had knew but more confusedly And yet to remove the Objection wholly it is certain the ancient Cabalists were acquainted with the Names of Father Son and Holy Ghost They gave the Name of Father to the first of their Sephiroth whom they called En Soph i. e. Infinite to express his Incomprehensibility This we have in Zohar from whence it is easie to conclude that they must own the Son also the Name of Father being relative to the Son But further they knew that second Person by the name Coema Wisdom even that Wisdom by which the Word was created c. according to Prov. 3.19 The Lord by Wisdom hath founded the Earth This Notion was so ancient among the Jews that the Jerusalem Targum hath rendred the first verse of Genesis thus The Lord created by his Wisdom The Christians call'd him the Word and Wisdom alluding to divers places especially Psal xxxiii 6. and Prov. viii 14. The Jews commonly call him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second Glory and the Crown of the Creation Rittanget brings their Authorities for this in Seph Jetzira p. 4 5. They knew the third Person by the name of Binah or Intelligence because they thought it was he that gave Men the knowledg of what God was pleased to reveal to them In particular they called him the Sanctifier and the Father of Faith nor is any thing more common among them than to give him the name of the Spirit of Holiness or the Holy Spirit The same Doctrine is to be found in several other Books of the Cabalists which are known to most Christians because they are Printed
consulted Philo's Notions of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before he made this Judgment notwithstanding that he could not but see them in Grotius on St. John's Gospel which he quotes and he could not but know how much they were insisted upon by those Writers whom he pretended to answer They do indeed so distinctly and clearly establish the Personality of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they render useless and unsuitable all the Interpretations he has found out for the Texts in the Targums The second is that he himself though he fitted his Interpretations to divers passages in the Targum thereby to break the force of them when turned against him is yet forced to acknowledg that sometimes the word Memra signifies a Person properly so called according to our sense of it The several places where the Word is said to create the World give him much trouble to elude them And though he endeavours to rid his hands of them by asserting the Word does there signifie the Power of God nevertheless he lets you understand that if you are not pleased with that Solution you may have his consent to take it in the Arian sense of the word for a created God by whom as by a real and Instrumental cause God did truly create the Universe This is the strangest answer that could be returned to so great an Objection For he must have lost his Reason who imagins that God can make a Creature capable of creating the Universe Grant this and by what Character will you distinguish the Creature from the Creator By what right then could God appropriate as he doth very often in the Old Testament the work of the World's Creation to himself excluding any other from having to do in it but himself Why should God upon this score forbid the giving worship to the Creature which is due to the Creator The Arians who worship Jesus Christ though they esteem him a Creature and those Papists who swallow whole the Doctrine of Transubstantion they may teach in their Schools that a Creature may be inabled by God to become a Creator But for us who deny that any thing but God is to be adored as Philo did before us de Decal p. 581. de Monarch p. 628. We reject all such vain conceits of a Creature being any way capable to receive the Infinite Power of a Creator There are other places also which he found he could not easily evade so at length he consents that the Memra does often denote a Person in the Language of the Targums as where we read the Word spake and the Word said But what kind of Person An Angel a Created Angel in his Judgment that speaks in the Name of God And thus he thinks the Word is to be understood in those Paraphrases when they ascribe to the Word the leading of Israel through the Desert The Reader may judge how many Texts this Answer will fit by reviewing what has been said in the two foregoing Chapters He will find I have there prevented this Answer and shewed that Philo and the Targums did not take this for a created Angel but for a Divine Person who was called an Angel in respect of the Office he discharged according to the Oeconomy between the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity and of whom the Targums generally make express mention in places where the Hebrew Text hath Jehovah Elohim or the Angel of the Lord and sometimes where it hath simply the Name Jehovah However to leave no doubt in this matter we will undertake to prove further that the Word doth not signifie a Created Angel in Philo or in the Targums but a truly Divine Person It is true that Philo sometimes calls the Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Plural But elswhere he speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 singularly in terms that express his acknowledgment of him for the Creator of Angels and consequently for God This he does in his Book de Sacrif Abel p. 202. where he declares him to be the Word that appeared to Moses and separates him from the Angels which are the Hosts of God Again he describes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as true God as Creator of the World Lib. de Temulentia p. 190. D. 194. B. But the Angels after another manner de Plant. Noae p. 168. F. G. de Gigant p. 221. E. de Mundo p. 391. It is true he calls the Word an Archangel de Conf. Linguar p. 267. B. But in the same place he calls him the first-born of God the Image of God the Creator of the World p. 258. A. And in another place the Son of God that conducted Israel through the Wilderness Quis rer Divin Haeres p. 397. F.G. He was so far from taking the Word to be an Angel that he affirmed the Word used to appear to Men under the form of an Angel thus saith he the Word appeared to Jacob de Somn. p. 465. D. And to Hagar p. 466. B. We are to observe this carefully that we may make Philo agree with Philo. For one while he saith an Angel appeared to the Patriarchs and another time he saith the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeared to them his design being to acquaint us that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is named an Angel because he appeared as an Angel in these kinds of Manifestations of himself Now as to the Targums they likewise understand by this Angel a Person that is truly God For 1. Could they ascribe the Creation of the World to the Word as they do and yet think him to be a Creature Could they profess him the Creator of Mankind without asserting his Divinity Could they think him to be no better than an Angel and yet make him to be Worshipped by Men whom they know to be little lower than Angels Could they imagin him to have given the Law on Mount Sinai and not reflect on the Preface of the Law wherein the great Law-giver says I am Jehovah thy God that brought thee out of the Land of Egypt The Word is not so often called an Angel in the Targums as he is set forth with these Characters of God as the Reader may see especially in Jonathan's Targum and in that of Jerusalem Exod. iii. 14. xii 42. and in many other places 2. The Targums always distinguish the Word from the Angels representing them as Messengers employed by the Word as the Word himself is often described as God's Messenger Thus the Targ. on 1 King xix 11 12. on Psal lxviii 13 18. on 2 Chron. xxxii 21. They say the Word was attended with Angels when he gave the Law Targ. on 1 Chron. xxix 11. and when he assisted at the Interment of Moses Jonathan on Deut. xxxiv 6. 3. The Targums represent the Word as sitting on a High Throne and hearing the Prayers of the People Jon. on Deut. iv 7. 4. Jonathan saith expresly that the Word that spake to Moses was
the same who spake and the World was made and who was God of Abraham Exod. iii. 14 15. vi 4. So then if he who was the God of Abraham was only an Angel that Personated God then he who created the World was a created Angel which as I have shewed is absurd 5. It is impossible to explain otherwise what the Jews so unanimously affirm that God revealed himself face to face to Moses which is more than he granted any Prophet besides unless the Word that appeared to Moses was true God and not a meer Angel See Onk. on Deut. xxxiv 10 11. and the other Targums But what say they may not an Angel bear the Name of God when he sustains the Person of God was not the Ark called Jehovah because it was a Symbol of his Person Does not Jonathan on Numb xi 35 36. say to the Ark Revelare Sermo Domini redi This is indeed a Notion which the Socinians have borrowed of Abenezra on Exod. iii. and Joseph Albo de fund c. 8. And so they pretend that the Pillar of Cloud is called the Lord Exod. xiii 21. xiv 19. that the Ark is called the Lord Numb x. 35. that the Angel is called the Lord Judg. vi 15. The Name being given to the Symbol viz. the Ark and to the second Cause namely the Angel because of their representing God But to the great displeasure of our Modern Jews and Socinians that borrow their Weapons we have still enough of the ancient Jewish Pieces left to shew their quite contrary Sentiments in these matters For 1. they as has been already observed believed that the Angel spoken of in Judg. vi 15. was the Word and that this Word created the World as has been largely proved 2. Just the reverse of what our Moderns say did the Ancients hold as we gather from Philo. For instead of an Angel's taking the place of God he saith the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 took the place of an Angel De Somn. p. 466. As to the Ark it is folly to imagin that because God promised to dwell and to hear Prayers there and enjoyned Worship toward it therefore the Ark was called Jehovah The ancient Jews spoke not to the Ark but to God who resided between the Cherubims This is plainly expressed in those words of Jonathan Numb xi 35 36. Revelare Sermo Domini c. where the words are not addressed to the Ark it self but to him that promised to give them some Tokens of his Presence namely to the Word who created the World who redeemed Israel from Egypt who heard their Prayers over the Ark and who had shut up therein the Tables of the Law which he had given them on Mount Sinai And thus the Targum on 1 Chron. xiii 6. David and all Israel went up to remove the Ark of the Lord that dwelleth between the Cherubims whose Name is called on it or as 2 Sam. vi 2. Whose Name is called by the Name of the Lord of Hosts that dwelleth between the Cherubims In short the Scripture never gives to any Place or Creature the Name Jehovah in the Nominative Case either singly or joined with any other Noun in apposition But either in an Oblique Case as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or with a Verb Substantive understood as Jehovah Nissi Jehovah Shamma What the Socinians have to say more against this the Reader may see fully answered by Buxt Hist of the Ark c. 1. And the Reader shall have a full Satisfaction upon it out of the following Chapters It remains therefore certain That the Word mentioned in Philo and the Paraphrases is not an Angel but a Divine Person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Philo calls him many times and if the Expression be allowable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he speaks in Euseb Praep. vii 13. p. 322 323. But we must now go on to that which will remove all difficulties from this Subject and convince the Reader if any thing can do it That the Jews looked upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Divine Person I speak of the Appearances of an Angel who is called God and worshipped as God under the Old Testament And I thought fit for this very reason to enlarge more upon this Subject to prevent at once all the Objections of the New Jews and of the Unitarians CHAP. XIII That all the Appearances of God or of the Angel of the Lord which are spoken of in the Books of Moses have been referred to the Word by the Jews before Christ's Incarnation SOME of the late Jewish Commentators that have had Disputes with the Christians particularly those whose Comments are collected in the Hebrew Bible printed by Bomberg at Venice do oppose this Proposition with all their Might They have laid it down for a Rule That whereever God is said to be present there all the Celestial Family is with him i. e. the Angels by whose Ministry as they say God has ordinarily acted in his Appearances to men So saith Rabbi Solom Jarchi on Gen. xix 24. Whereas those Old Jews who followed the Tradition of their Forefathers being not biassed by the Spirit of Dispute understood it of the Cochma and Bina viz. of the Wisdom and of the Holy Ghost as we were admonished by R. Joseph de Karnitol in his Saare Tsedec fol. 25. col 4. fol. 26. col 2. This Collection of Commentators being of great use for the interpreting the Scriptures several Divines that have applied themselves to the Study of the Rabbins Comments have been led by them unwarily into this Opinion The renowned Grotius fell into this Snare and has had but too many Followers We have no cause to wonder that Papists do the same being concern'd as they are to find Examples in the Old Testament of Religious Worship paid to Angels the better to cover their Idolatry But in truth the Modern Jews do in this quite abandon the Ancient Sentiments of their Fathers And they who follow the Modern Jews herein do weaken I hope without thinking of it the Proofs of the Godhead of Jesus Christ by yielding up to the Modern Jews as an agreed Point between them and the Christians that which is quite contrary to what the Apostles and Primitive Christians supposed in their Disputes with the Jews of their Times and which our later Jews themselves would never have submitted to if they had known any other way to avoid the Arguments that were brought against them out of their own Scriptures It behoves us therefore to give their just Force to those Arguments that were used by the Apostles and Fathers and to recover to Truth all her Advantages by shewing how bad Guides our Modern Jews are in the matters now before us and how they have deviated from the constant Doctrine of their Ancestors to find out ways to defend themselves against the Christians I affirm then for certain That the Appearances of God or of any Angel that is called Jehovah or the God of
Righteousness Therefore it was the Word of the Lord that came to him in a Vision ver 1. and that made him that Promise ver 5. It followeth ver 7. that he said to Abraham I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees Who said this to Abraham Even the Word of the Lord according to Jonathan's Targum for there is no other Nominative Case of the Verb in his Paraphrase You see the same upon Abraham's dividing the Beasts in order to his making a Covenant with God it was done at God's Command who thereupon did appear between the Pieces to Abraham and did solemnly enter into a Covenant with Abraham Gen. xv 9 c. Now saith the Jerusalem Paraphrase on Exod. xii 42. It was the Word of the Lord that appeared to Abraham between the Pieces And according to Onkelos and Jonathan Exod. vi 8. It was by his Word that God made this Covenant with Abraham We must take notice that he that appeared then to Abraham saith I am El Shaddai which is here translated The Almighty God For according to Onkelos on Gen. xlix 25. in the Blessing of Jacob to his Son Joseph these Names The Word of God and El Shaddai are of the same Extent Thus it runs according to Onkelos The Word of the God of thy Father shall help thee and El Shaddai shall bless thee Where plainly El Shaddai is the same that is called The Word of the God of thy Father As Philo taught us that the Appearance of God to Abraham mentioned Gen. xviii 1. was an Appearance of the Word Alleg. 11. p. 77. E. where he calls one of the Three Angels that appeared to Abraham the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of God and Josephus L. 1. Ant. c. 12. calls him God So the Jerusalem Paraphrase has it in the end of the next Verse The Word of the Lord appeared to Abraham in the Valley of Vision as he sat warming himself in the Sun because of his Circumcision Elsewhere the same Paraphrase quotes these Words as being the Words of Scripture saying on Gen. xxxv 9. The Scripture hath declared and said And the Word of the Lord appeared to him in the Valley of Vision Jonathan also in his Paraphrase on Deut. xxxiv 6. hath these words The Lord hath taught us to visit the Sick in that he revealed himself by the Vision of his Word to Abraham when he was sick of the cutting of Circumcision When God gave him a Command for the sacrificing of his Son Gen. 22.2 then as Abraham was doing it the Angel of the Lord called to him out of Heaven and told him Now I know thou fearest God seeing thou hast not withheld thy Son thine only Son from ME. This last word plainly sheweth that this Angel was God himself even the same that spake to Abraham and gave him that Command ver 1 2. And that Command was given by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word according to Philo as it has been already shewn The Jerusalem Paraphrase hath the same on ver 8. where upon Isaac's enquiring for the Lamb that was to be sacrificed Abraham answereth him My Son the Word of the Lord will prepare me a sheep And so when Abraham found that the Word did provide him a Sheep and accepted of that for a Sacrifice instead of his Son Abraham worshipped and pray'd to the Word of the Lord saying among many other things Thou O Lord didst speak to me that I should offer up Isaac my Son In the other Targums ver 16 17. where the Angel of the Lord calls to Abraham out of Heaven the second time which last word sheweth that this Angel was God himself for it was God that called to him out of Heaven the first time as it has been already shewn and saith to Abraham By my self I have sworn saith the Lord because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thine only son from me From me is in the Samaritan and LXX therefore in blessing I will bless thee c. There both Onkelos and Jonathan have it By my Word I have sworn saith the Lord. What should be their meaning in this For the manner of speaking Thus saith the Lord it was properly used by the Word appearing here as an Angel and not according to his own Natural Being But for the Form of the Oath where according to the Hebrew Text chap. xx God swore by Himself the Paraphrasts render it that God swore by his Word and well they might who understood that the Word was God And indeed these Targums shew elsewhere That where this Form of Swearing was used it was the Word of the Lord that swore and held himself obliged to perform what was sworn Compare Exod. vi 8. with Deut. xxvi 3. And Numb xiv 30. with Deut. xxxi 7. We read of an Angel appearing to Hagar in the Wilderness Gen. xvi 7. He bid her return and submit to Sarah her Mistress ver 9. telling her withal what a numerous Issue she should have by the Child she now went with and what sort of man he should be But as this Angel spoke in the Stile of God saying I will multiply thy seed exceedingly ver 10. So she owned it was the Lord that spake to her and she said to him Thou God seest me ver 13. 'T is clear that it was God himself that appeared tho he is called an Angel in the Text. And therefore not only Philo calleth him the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in those places above-mentioned but the Targums likewise shew that he was the Word of the Lord according to the Sense of the Jewish Church for so Jonathan renders ver 13. She confessed before the Lord Jehovah whose Word had spoken to her And the Jerusalem Targum She confessed and prayed to the Word of the Lord who had appeared to her Again an Angel called to Hagar out of Heaven Gen. xxi 16. But he also said to her that which no created Angel could say speaking of her Son Ishmael I will make him a great Nation ver 18. Philo saith that it was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And who perform'd it 'T was God the Word according to the Targums For whereas the Text saith ver 20. God was with the Lad it is thus rendred both by Onkelos and Jonathan The Word of the Lord was his Support or Assistance We read also of Two Divine Appearances to Isaac one in Gerar Gen. xxvi 2. and the other at Beersheba ver 24. In the former of these places Isaac being ready to have gone down into Egypt God bid him continue in Canaan and gave him a Promise in these words Gen. xxvi 3. I will be with thee and will bless thee for unto thee and thy Seed I will give all these Countries and I will perform the Oath which I sware unto Abraham thy Father So then he that appeared now to Isaac is the same that swore this to Abraham so much we learn from
made the Word of the Lord King over you this day that he may be your Glory And v. 18. The VVord of the Lord is become King over you in his own Name as over his beloved and peculiar people In consequence hereof as being their King he ordered them by his chief Minister Moses to make him a Royal Pavilion or Tabernacle and to set it up in the midst of their Camp Both that and all the furniture of it he ordered Moses to make according to the Pattern show'd him in the Mount Exod. xxv 40. Especially for the Presence of the great King there must be an Apartment in the inner part of the Tabernacle separated from the rest with a Veil Embroidered with Cherubims Exod. xxvii 31. which part was called the Most Holy Place or the Holy of Holies Exod. xxvi 33. There was to be placed the Ark overlay'd with pure Gold and having a Crown of Gold round about it In the Ark were contain'd the Tables of the Law Upon it was placed the Mercy-seat overshadowed with the Wings of two Cherubims that stood on the two Ends of the Mercy-seat Exod. xxxvii 9. looking each of them toward the other and both of them toward the Mercy-seat This Provision being made for the place of his Shekinah the Word which shewed it self before in a Pillar of Cloud by day and fire by night that stood over the Camp now from thence came to take possession of his Royal Seat in the Tabernacle over the Ark from whence out of the void space between these Cherubims it was that the Word used to speak to Moses and to give him Orders from time to time for the Government of his People according to the Paraphrasts on Exod. xxv 22. xxx 36. Numb xvii 4. and especially Numb vii 8 9. as has been above mentioned Henceforward throughout their whole Journey through the Wilderness the Pillar was constantly over the Tabernacle and the People attended his motion But whensoever he gave the Commandment then the Pillar removed and shewed which way the Camp was to go Upon notice of that then Moses first gave the word in a set form of Prayer which we have in the first six verses of the lxviii Psalm The first verse of it is Numb x. 35. in these words according to the Jerusalem Targum Arise now Oh Word of the Lord in the might of thy strength According to Jonathan's Paraphrase Appear now Oh Word of the Lord in the strength of thy wrath In both the Targums it followeth as in the Hebrew Text and the enemies of thy people shall be scattered and they that hate thee shall flee before thee When they had performed their Journey according to the will of their King which they knew by seeing the Pillar stand still then Moses used the Form for the resting of the Ark Numb x. 36. according to the forementioned Targums Return now Oh Word of the Lord to thy people Israel make the Glory of thy Shekinah dwell among them and have mercy on the Thousands of Israel This being said the Priests who carried the several â—ins of the Tabernacle took down their Burdens and set up all things as before and the Pillar returned to its place over the midst of the Tabernacle In this State of Theocracy their keeping of God's Laws is called by their Targums The believing and obeying of the Word their breaches of his Laws are called their despising and rebelling against the Word Of the use of both these manners of speaking there might be given more instances than can be easily numbred The Targums likewise ascribe to the Word both the rewarding of their Obedience and the punishing of their Transgressions On their Obedience according to the Targums it was the usual promise that the Word should be their help or support Numb xxiii 8 21. that he should bless them and multiply them Deut. xxiv 19. that he should rejoice over them to do them good Deut. xxviii 63. xxx 9. They were told that he would be a consuming fire to their enemies Deut. iv 24. particularly that he was so to the Anakims Deut. ix 3. That it was he that delivered Og into their hands Deut. iii. 2. That it was he that would cast out all the Nations before them Deut. xi 22. On the other hand according to the sense of the ancient Church it was the Word that punished them for their disobedience and also it was he that forgave them upon their Repentance Of both these kinds there are many remarkable instances as particularly of the punishing of their disobedience according to Jonathan on Exod. xxxii 35. It was the Word that destroyed the people for worshipping the Calf that Aaron made For their lusting at Kibroth-hattaava Moses told them whom they provoked by it Numb xi 20. according to Onkelos and Jonathan You have despised the Word of the Lord whose Shekinah dwelleth among you Their refusing to go forward toward the promised Land upon the Spies evil report of it Moses tells them according to those Targums Deut. i. 26. It was rebelling against the Word of the Lord. Afterward when they would go up contrary to order Numb xiv 41. Moses asks them Why do you transgress the decree of the Word of the Lord In their murmuring at Zalmona Polyglot Vol. IV. Numb xxi 5. according to Onkelos in one of Clerk's various Readings They spoke against the Word of the Lord and against Moses Wherefore v. 6. according to the Jerusalem Targum The Word of the Lord sent fiery Serpents among the People Upon their Whoring with Baal-Peor Numb xxv 4. according to the Jerusalem Targum The Word of the Lord said to Moses take all the heads of the people and hang them up before the Lord. In short according to the Targums on Deut. xxviii 20 21 22 c. It was the Word of the Lord that would send all his Judgments and Curses that are there denounced against impenitent Sinners But on the other hand according to those Targums the Word had the dispencing of pardon to them that were Qualified for it So when Moses beg'd pardon for his People that had sinned beyond mercy if it had not been infinite Numb xiv 20. according to the Jerusalem Targum the Word of the Lord answered him and said behold I have forgiven and pardoned according to thy word And in case upon the inflicting of God's Judgments above mentioned God's People should be thereby brought to repentance It was promised Deut. xxx 3. according to Jonathan's Targum that then the Word should accept their repentance according to his good pleasure and should have mercy on them and gather them out of all Naons c. So likewise c. xxxii 36. according to the same Targum it is promised that the Word of the Lord by his mercy should judge the judgment of his people and should repent him of the evil that he had decreed against his Servants It were easie to add many more such Instances out of
which God hath founded the Earth as David tells us Psal ciii 24. is the same which is spoken by Solomon Prov. iii. 19. 't is the sense of all the Targums Midrashim and Cabalistic Authors upon the first of Genesis as you see in R. Mardochay and in Menachem de Rakanati upon the 1st of Genesis 2dly They take indifferently this Wisdom and the Shekinah or the Memra or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the same Person referring to it the same Actions the same Power the same Worship the same Majesty 3dly They understand the Wisdom which rules the World as it is said Prov. viii to be the same which is spoken of Prov. iii. 19. and to be the Son of the living God the same who spoke by Ezek. xxii 2. see R. Menach in Pent. fol. 1. col 2. from Bereshit Rabba and from Zohar Ibid. fol. 2. col 1. fol. 35. col 1. fol. 44. col 1. And fourthly They refer many Places to that Wisdom which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Shekinah and the Son to the Messias for example it is clear that Psalm xlv belongs to the Messias as being the Bridegroom of the Church Now they suppose that the Shekinah is the Bridegroom of the Synagogue R. Menach in Pent. fol. 15. col 1. and they refer to the Shekinah the place of Isaiah chap. lxii 3. which is nothing but the same Idea of Psalm xlv So they refer the Song of Solomon to the Shekinah or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 R. Menach de Rekan in Pent. fol. 58. col 4. fol. 76. col 1. col 3. which is manifestly to be understood of the Messias and so they pretend that the Kiss which is mentioned there Cant. i. 1. signifies mystically the Shekinah R. Menach fol. 44. col 1. It is notorious that the Goel that famous Redeemer which is promised in so many Prophets to the Synagogue is the Messias Now the constant Idea of the Jewish Writers is that the Shekinah is to be that very Redeemer Rab. Menach de Rekanati in Pent. fol. 58. col 4. fol. 59. col 1. fol. 83. col 4. fol. 97. col 4. So that nothing is more evident than that the Jews who took the Wisdom to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the proper Son of God and look upon the Shekinah or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being to be the Messias must have lookt upon the Messias as being the proper Son of God In Isaiah iv 2. the Messias is called the branch of the Lord no doubt as properly as he is called the branch of David Jerem. xxiii 5. In that day saith he the branch of the Lord shall be beautiful and glorious which is in Jonathan's Paraphrase interpreted of the Messias From which it is natural to conclude that the proper Son of God was to be the Messias and the Messias was to be the proper Son of God In Isaiah ix 6 7. we read of a Son given and what are the Characters of this Son they follow His name shall be Wonderful Counsellor the mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of Peace The Jews long after Christ understood this place of the Messias and Solomon Jarchi who dyed in the Year 1180. is perhaps the first after R. Hillel that fell from the common Traditional Sense of his Nation in referring these Titles to God and not the Messias But I have taken notice before in speaking of the several appearances of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Angel who appeared to Gideon and who was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did take the same name of Wonderful which is given here to the Messias Jeremiah keeps to the same notion of a branch to denote a Son Jerem. xxiii 5. xxxiii 15. and the Targum explains it of the Messias Zachary ch vi 12. doth also call him the branch which not only the Jews before Christ as we have shewn from Philo but those after Christ Echa Rabbathi p. 58. col 2. interpreted of the Messias as being the Word And here let me remark to you a few of Philo's Notions which may serve for a Key to the right understanding of the Sentiments of Philo concerning divers Prophecies in the Old Testament One while he saith Lib. de conf Ling. 267. that God is one but without excluding his Word who is his Image and first-born from being one with him Another time he calls the Word an Archangel a Man he that sees Israel c. Whence comes this but that he saw the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was sometimes represented as Head of the Angels in respect of his Divinity and at other times as a Man with regard to his intended coming in the Flesh To this coming he seems to apply the Promise Levit. xxvi 11 12. I will walk among you and be your God De nom mut p. 840. C. I am sure the later Jews as Ramban upon that place after the Author of Torath Cohanim do build here the opinion of a real habitation of the Divinity amongst them in the times of the Messias and that they derive from one of their most ancient Traditions that the Salvation of Israel shall be made by God himself which they prove by Zech. ix 9. where it is spoken of the Messias by the confession of the Jews till this day Again Philo calls the Word of the Lord the Shepherd and quotes for it Psal xxiii 1. The Lord is my Shepherd De nom mut p. 822. 823. A. De Agric. in Euseb p. 323. Now the Word being the same with the Messias c. 13. it is plain this Psalm was in his days applied to the Messias who consequently is the Lord Jehovah and the people his sheep I have before observed the rules by which the Jews were led to the knowledg of this Truth and therefore it is unnecessary to touch again on them It suffices to remark here first that the Synagogue in Philo's time held it a Maxim that the name Jehovah express'd the Essence of God Philo Lib. Deter pot in s p. 143. C. Secondly that the name Jehovah was the proper name of God the name of the first Cause and consequently communicable to no Creature Philo de Abrahamo p. 280. a Truth of great moment which is confessed also by Manass ben Israel q. in Exod. 3. Thirdly that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he takes to be meant by the Branch in Zech. vi 12. was to become the Messias and therefore that the Messias is justly called in this respect the Son of God And now it is easie to judge of the sense the ancient Synagogue had of the Person of the Messias It acknowledges this Son and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Person subsisting from all Eternity Of this if we had no other the Text of Mic. v. 2. is a good proof which the Jews in Christ's time expounded of the Messias Mat. ii 7. Joh. vii 42. But the Notions of Philo
1. That the Targum plainly owns on Psal xlv 6. Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever And ver 7. O God thy God hath anointed thee with the oyl of gladness above thy fellows That the Messias is God This Truth is yet more clear in Isa ix 6. applied to the Messias by Jonathan and the present Jews cannot satisfie themselves with any answer they make to it as appears by their different ways of evasion and their changing the very Text to avoid the evidence of it 2ly The Targum on Isa xxviii 5. hath these considerable words In that day the Messias of the Lord of Hosts shall be crowned with joy instead of the Lord of Hosts as it is in the Text. 3ly The Targum on Jer. xxiii acknowledges the Messias to be there treated of and yet he is called in this place the Lord of our Righteousness See to the same purpose the Targum on Jer. xxxiii 14. The learned M. Edzardi has proved that the same Interpretation of these words of Jeremy hath continued among the Jews from the time of Jesus Christ without interruption till these latter days and this he hath done from a great number of Jewish Authors and even their Liturgies themselves which I have no mind to transcribe His Book was Printed at Hamburgh A. 1670. 4ly They have been so sensible that the Messias is represented by the Prophets as God that in Psal cx where it is said of the Messias that he shall be a Priest according to the order of Melchisedeck they refer the Priesthood of the Messias to God or to the Shekinah which is Jehovah So doth R. Menach fol. 18. col 1. fol. 31. col 1. Without that it is hard to conceive how Philo should so often mention the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Priest and Prophet of God and at the same time believe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be God unless he gathered it from Psal cx 1. where the Messias that is represented as sitting at the right hand of God and equal to God is also described as an High Priest of a new Order and from Isa xi 2. where the Messias is promised to receive the Spirit of Prophecy in the highest degree I need not cite the Paraphrasts any further on this Subject What I have already quoted out of them is more than enough to shew how common this Idea was among their Nation For the Jews in the Ages next to these Paraphrases I ought to observe this one thing of Pirke Eliezer ch xiv There they assert that God descended nine times and that the tenth time he shall descend in the Age to come i. e. in the time of the Messias The first time was in the Garden of Eden The second at the Confusion of Tongues The third at the destruction of Sodom The fourth at his talking with Moses on Mount Horeb. The fifth at his appearance on Sinai The sixth and seventh where he spake to Moses in the hollow of the Rock The eighth and ninth in the Tabernacle The tenth will be when he shall appear in the times of the Messias Such is their ancient Opinion The Prophecies that speak of it as one end of the coming of the Messias to judge his People and the Nations do constantly ascribe the Name of God or of Jehovah to the Messias We see it in Psalm lxxxii 8. Arise O God and judge the earth for thou shalt inherit all nations Which is followed by Daniel ch vii 13 14. in these words I saw in the night visions and behold one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven and came to the ancient of days and there was given him dominions and glory and a kingdom that all people nations and languages should serve him His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed The Jews confess three things one is that Psalm lxxii is to be understood of the Messias The second is That in the Vision of Ezech. ch i. that form of a man sitting upon the Throne signifies the true God the third That the Vision of Daniel ch vii is the same in substance with that of Ezek. i. So that the Messias as a Man receives an absolute Empire upon all Nations and sits upon a Throne as God Now it should be the most absurd thing in the World to conceive the Messias as only a Man when he is invested with such an Empire which cannot be governed but by a true God and by Jehovah whose Character is represented so often as the Ruler of all Nations See Gen. xviii 25. The Prophecies that speak of Jehovah as the King and Bridegroom of his Church are constantly interpreted of the Messias For example where God said to his People Hos ii 19 20. I will betroth thee unto me for ever I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness and in judgment and in loving-kindness and in mercies I will even betroth thee unto me in faithfulness and thou shalt know the Lord. This the Jews generally understand of the Messias 'T is the judgment of R. Menachem in Genes fol. 15. col 1. where he reflects upon Isaiah ch lxii 3. And it is agreeable to what is said Psal xlv 7 9 10 11. Thy throne O God is for ever and ever the scepter of thy kingdom is a scepter of righteousness thou lovest righteousness and hatest iniquity wherefore O God thy God hath anointed thee with the oyl of gladness above thy fellows Kings daughters were among thy honourable women upon thy right hand did stand the Queen in gold of Ophir Hearken O daughter and consider forget thy own people and thy father's house So shall the King greatly desire thy beauty for he is thy Lord and worship thou him Whereas the Targum v. 2. interprets it all of the Messias so R. Meir Arama says all agree that that Psalm is to be understood of the Messias We cannot have a better proof that the Messias should be Jehovah than Zech. xii 10. which the Targum also interprets of the Messias and the new Jews would refer to the feigned Messias Son of Joseph The words are these I Jehovah will pour upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and supplication and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son In Malach. iii. 1. we find this expression Behold I will send my messenger and he shall prepare the way before me and the Lord whom you seek shall suddenly come to his temple even the messenger or the Angel of the Covenant whom you delight in Now take notice that whereas it is said after in the Hebrew here he is coming the Greeks have read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now since it is certain that he is the Jehovah to whom the Temple is here said to be built and dedicated and who is
that this place was related to the Messias that it was used at our Saviour's Entry into Jerusalem Mat. xxi 16. Since that time it is related to the Messias as we see in the Midrash upon Cant. i. 4. where these very words are referred to God whom the Babes of Israel were to bless which shews plainly that the praises which are spoken of are praises which are acts of Adoration and so in the Midrash upon Eccl. ch ix 1. The same positive order for the Worship of the Messias is given in Psal xlv 11. He is the Lord worship thou him There is no doubt but that Psalm is to be referred to the Messias It is so acknowledged by the Targum and by all the Jewish Interpreters What then can be said against the Worship of the Messias If the Jews of old had denied that the Shekinah was to be in the Messias then it should be rational to conclude that they did not acknowledge the Worship which is to be paid to him But they have acknowledged the Divinity of the Messias as we read in Midrash Tehillim in Psal x. Stetit Divinitas Messiae praedicavit From whence it follows by necessary consequence that they thought themselves obliged to worship him We have the same Worship of the Messias setled in Psal lxviii 32. where it is said that the Princes shall extend their hands to him from Egypt All the Jews agree that such a thing is to happen at the coming of the Messias which we call the second So Rashi We read the same in Psal lxxii where it is said v. 11. that they shall fall down and worship him No body doubts but that Psalm relates to the Messias I have taken notice in the second Chapter of this Book that the Jews refer constantly to the time of the Messias all the Psalms from the xc to the c. Now in Psal xcv v. 6 7. the words seem to be spoken of Jehovah but they were understood by the Jews of the Messias who was to have the name of Jehovah as you see in Midrash in Echa i. 6. After David what saith Isaiah of the Worship of the Messias he speaks as distinctly as can be ch xlix v. 23. The Jews understand it of the Messias whom they look upon as the Redeemer to whom all people are to make their confession from their heart as you see in Breshit Rabba upon Gen. xli v. 44. where they refer these words to the Messias Isa xlv 23. You see the same in Midr. Tehin in Psal ii 2. these words when they have seen his great tribulation they shall come and shall worship the King Messias as it is said Isa xlix 23. Some perhaps shall think they can avoid the strength of this Argument drawn from the Worship to be paid to the Messias by allowing that it is spoken in those places which I have quoted of a civil worship to be paid to the Messias as a great King But it should be in vain for a Socinian to employ such an evasion because we find that the ancient Jews have prevented it by giving us instances of all the several Parts of such a Worship either Faith Vows or Prayers or Sacrifices which cannot be paid but to a true God and I have quoted so many places upon that point that I do not think fit to enlarge more upon it I shall then conclude this matter by the solemn Prayer of the Jews in the Feast of Succoth where they have these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ego ille Salva nunc p. 53. of the Venice Edit in 8 o. which words the Jews labour very much to explain who is that ille but which the most understanding explain to the two first Middoth viz. to the Father and to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as we have shewn before Having now produced the Sentiments of the old Jews as to several points that concern the Trinity and the Divinity of our Lord we ought next to consider how Jesus Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Christians did follow these Notions of the Synagogue CHAP. XIX That the New Testament does exactly follow the Notions which the Old Jews had of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Messias WHoever shall attentively examine the method which our Saviour and his Apostles follow in the New Testament will find it exactly suited to the Notions which the Jews had entertained and which they had from the Writings of the Prophets It was absolutely necessary it should be so because the Doctrine concerning the coming of the Messias began to be more narrowly inquired into among the Jews when they saw Herod who was an Idumean setled in the Throne of Judaea it being at the just time markt out for the coming of the Messias by Jacob's Prophecy Ge. xlix 10. The Scepter shall not depart from Judah nor a Law-giver from between his feet until Shilo come and unto him shall the gathering of people be An Angel therefore appears to the Virgin Mary that was to be the Mother of Christ and shews the manner of his Conception which was to be by the operation of the Holy Ghost He names the Child who was to be born of her Jesus and declares that he should be the Son of the Highest and that of his Kingdom there should be no end Alluding to Psal ii and to many other places of Scripture where the Messias is described as one that was to be the Son of God Next the Angel appeared to Joseph who was upon parting with his betrothed Wife the Blessed Virgin and told him she should bring forth a Son and must name him Jesus because he should save his People from their sins Whereupon the Evangelist saith that this Child was he of whom the Prophet foretold he should be Emanuel God with us He was to do that for his People which none but God was able to do to save them from their sins How could he shew it better that he was the God of the Jews to whom Judea belonged as his Country and the Jews as his People as it was foretold Is vii and viii That God whose very Name Habakkuk had named Hab. iii. 18. the God of my Salvation so called saith Jonathan's Targum because of the wonderful things that God would do by his Messias Another Angel brings to the Shepherds the news of Christ's Birth and what words does he use He names him the Christ the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Jehovah God's own proper name Luk. ii The Wisemen came from the East to Bethlehem guided by a new Star to worship him and amongst other Gifts presented him with Frankincense which by the Law was to be offered to God alone Shewing thereby that they owned him for that heavenly Star spoken of by their Countryman Balaam Numb xxiv 17. And for that King of whom it was foretold Psal lxxii 10 11. The Kings of Tharshish and of the Isles shall bring presents the Kings of Sheba and Seba
shall offer gifts Yea all Kings shall fall down before him all Nations shall serve him Simeon inspired by the Spirit of Prophecy said that Christ was to be a light to lighten the Gentiles Luk. i. 79. alluding to Isaiah xlii 6. and lx 1. which speaks of the Messias He said further that this Child was to prove the fall of many in Israel according to that Prophecy Is viii 13 14. Sanctify the Lord of Hosts himself and let him be your fear and let him be your dread And he the Lord of Hosts shall be for a sanctuary but for a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem In which place the Prophet speaks of the Lord of Hosts and clearly points out the Messias or the Word according to Jonathan's Targum And because the Angels had celebrated the Nativity of Christ with their Acclamations St. Paul Heb. i. 6. applies to him what the Jews had added to the Song of Moses in the LXX Deut. xxxii 43. Let all the Angels of God worship him at his coming into the World which words are also found Psal xcvii 7. from whence they had added them as well as some others borrowed from other places of Scripture which the Jews understand of the Messias Hitherto a judicious Reader will find no notion but what is perfectly like to those of the Old Testament and of the Writings of the Jews about those places of Scripture which call the Messias Jehovah or represent Jehovah as him that should be the Messias Mr. N. who does suspect the Primitive Christians to have added these words Matt. xxviii 19. Go and teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost to favour the new Doctrine of the Trinity might as well at one blow have cut off those places in St. Matthew Matth. i. 20. and St. Luke Luk. i. 79. which do more strongly assert that Doctrine For there we find the Highest the Son of the Highest and the Holy Ghost three Persons as distinct as words could make them And the Messias is as plainly called Jehovah as can be Both Angels and Prophets either shew or own the Ancient Prophets to have been fulfilled in Christ There is nothing in all this that looks like a Collusion John the Baptist Luk. iii. 3. preacht Repentance as it is written Is xl 3. The voice of one crying in the wilderness prepare ye the way of the Lord make his paths strait and all flesh shall see the salvation of God owning the Messias to be God and Jehovah When the Jews took him to be the Messias he told them that he was not worthy to unloose the latchet of his shoes that he was before him that he shall baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire And that he was spoken of Mal. iii. 1. Now Malachi calls him Jehova though he also calls him the messenger of the Covenant as I observed before Christ is baptized by John who at first refused to baptize him knowing the dignity of his Person whose Forerunner he only was But God the Father cries from Heaven This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased confirming what he had said of the Messias Is xliii 10. The Holy Spirit descended upon him in the form of a Dove to fulfil the Prophecy of David Psal xlv 7. O God thy God has anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows And that of Is xi 2. And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him The three Persons of the Trinity did then so visibly manifest themselves that the Ancients took from thence occasion to bid the Arians Go to the river Jordan and you shall see the Trinity He was in the Wilderness tempted by the Devil but the main stress of his Temptation the Devil laid on these words if or rather since thou art the Son of God For knowing the illustrious Testimony which was given him at Jordan and by John the Baptist Joh. i. 34. I saw and bare record that this is the Son of God He took from thence occasion to tempt him In his conversation with Nathanael he begins to discover to him the Mystery of his being God by comparing himself to the Ladder which Jacob saw in a Dream Joh. i. 51. Hereafter you shall see heaven open and the Angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man And I observed before that Philo attributed that Apparition to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Restorer of intercourse between God and Man At a Marriage in Cana to shew that his Commission was much above the meanness of his Education and Trade he spoke something sharply to his Mother Joh. ii 4. Woman what have I to do with thee Much as he had done being yet but Twelve years old when upon her complaining that his Father and her self had sought him sorrowing he gave her this Answer How is it that you sought me wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business Luk. ii 49 Soon after he went to Jerusalem and drove out of the Temple the Sellers and Money-Changers and told them Take these things hence make not my Father's house a house of merchandise Joh. ii 16. The Jews surprized at that commanding Style askt him a Sign to shew his Authority To whom he answered Destroy this Temple and in three days I 'll raise it up ver 19. foretelling his Resurrection and declaring that he was to be the Author of it v. 21. which in the opinion of the Jews themselves is the proper Character of God who has say they the Key of the Womb to make it fruitful the Key of the Heavens to send down Rain and the Key of the Grave to raise the Dead out of it Beth Israel ex Sanhedrim fol. 140. col 3. To satisfy Nicodemus a Ruler of the Jews about the greatness of his Person he tells him contrary to the opinion of some Jews Pirke R. Eliezer c. 41. who believed that Moses had ascended up into Heaven from Mount Sina That no man had ascended up thither but he that was come from thence even the Son of man which was there Joh. iii. 13. But how could he be in Heaven and have descended from thence Because he was the Son of God whom God had sent to save the world v. 17. In which Expressions he alludes to the Prayers of the Old Jews before mentioned where the Church begs that a Saviour would come down from Heaven even the true Jehovah Is lxiv. 1. When John's Disciples came to their Master to complain that he whom he had lately baptized did himself baptize and draw the Multitude after him To give them a nobler notion of Christ than they had before he told them plainly that he was only the friend of the bridegroom but that Christ was the bridegroom himself Joh. iii. 29. Intimating by that Similitude
that Christ was God according to the Prophecy in Hosea ch ii 19 20. I will betroth thee unto me for ever This John's Disciples well knew and that the Messias was spoken of Psal xlv in which he is expresly named God That Solomon's Song did speak of him And the Jews believe to this day that God was spoken of there by Solomon And this has obliged the Holy Writers to give to the Messias the name of Bridegroom and to the Church that of a Bride as may be seen in St. Paul and in the Revelation John the Baptist further tells his Disciples that Christ was before him in Dignity because he was in being before him Joh. i. 15 30. and yet John was born six Months before our Blessed Saviour Jesus tells them that he came from above whereas himself though inspired and a Prophet was only of the Earth That Christ was come from Heaven and above all That God was his Father and that he had given all things into his hand Joh. iii. 31 35. shewing thereby that it was he whom God spoke of Psal ii 8. Ask of me and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession Christ said Luk. v. 20 21 24. to a man sick of the Palsie thy sins are forgiven thee which the Pharisees taking ill because as they told him God alone could forgive sins he cured the poor man to shew that he had power to forgive sins and consequently that he was God by their own confession And he performed that according to the Prophecies which attribute to God and to the Messias the forgiveness of sins Jer. xxxi 34. The Jews being angry with him because he had cured an impotent man on the Sabbath-day Joh. v. 16. he tells them to justify what he had done My Father works hitherto and I work v. 17. At which words they sought more to kill him because he had not only broken the sabbath but said also that God was his Father making himself equal with God v. 18. What would a good man have done in this case one that had been only Man as we are He would certainly have declared his abhorrence of such Blasphemy as was contain'd in these words But then he would have told them these were not his words but theirs He would have them understand him aright by saying he did not make himself equal with God but that in working a Miracle on the Sabbath he only acted as the Prophets did to whom say the Jews it was lawful to break some one Precept of the Law But instead of making any such Interpretation he goes on in the same tenor of words and a second time gives himself the title of the Son of God and tells them that whatever his Father did he might do likewise v. 19. That he would raise the dead to prove himself equal with God That as the Father raised up the dead and quickens them even so the Son quickens whom he will v. 21. That that extraordinary Power was given him by his Father it being his will that all men should honour the Son even as they did the Father v. 23. He proves again that he was the Son of God by the power he had to raise up the dead As the Father has life in himself so has he given to the Son to have life in himself And has given him authority to execute judgment also because he is the Son of man v. 26 27. He applies to himself what was said in Daniel xii 2. concerning the Resurrection of the Dead v. 28 29. The hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth They that have done good unto the resurrection of life and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation He appeals to John the Baptist who had testified he was the Son of God v. 33. At last he bids them search the Scriptures v. 39. in which they would find that he was that Son of Man described Dan. vii 13 14. and consequently equal with God For who can sit on God's Throne besides the true God as it is declared Psal cx 1. The Lord said unto my Lord sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool Which words the Jews understood of the Messias agreeably to other Prophecies in which he is so often called Jehovah and the Son of God He justified his curing Sick People on the Sabbath-day because he the Son of man was Lord of the Sabbath But how could he be so but because he was that Word which had given the Law to the Jews that Son of God equal with his Father who consequently was Master of his own Laws He opened the Eyes of the Blind and made the Lame to walk to fulfil the Prophecy Is xxxv 4 5 6. Behold your God will come he will come and save you then the eyes of the blind shall be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopt Then shall the lame man leap as a hart and the tongue of the dumb sing He multiply'd the Loaves in the Desert to shew that he was that same Word to which the Jews attributed the Miracle of Manna in the Wilderness He tells the Jews to the same purpose that he was the Bread come down from Heaven Joh. vi 51. upon which it may be observed that Philo maintains that the Word was Manna or at least Manna the Type of the Word Lib. quod deterior p. 137. Having wrought so many great Miracles before the Jews he askt his Disciples what People said and thought of him To which St. Peter answering according to the People's various Opinions and at last confessing the Faith of himself and the other Disciples that he was Christ the Son of the living God he commends this Confession in Peter though he had before refused to receive it from the Devil and tells Peter that God even his Father had revealed it to him and therefore it must be true Matth. xvi 16 17. And so it was for God had spoken of it by many of his Prophets as I shewed before by the very confession of the Jews He shews his Disciples how Elijah was come in the Person of John the Baptist Matt. xvii That therefore himself to whom John had born witness was the Messias the true Jehovah whose Fore-runner Elias was to be according to the Prophecy Mal. iii. 1. Behold I will send my messenger and he shall prepare the way before ME and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his Temple even the Messenger of the covenant whom ye delight in saith the Lord of hosts He gives his Disciples the power of Binding and Loosing that is of forbidding some things which Moses had permitted and permitting some which he had forbidden reserving still to himself the power of directing them infallibly by his Spirit in those Acts of their Ministry To shew that he was that very God
have already quoted Being by Judas's Treason apprehended he declared that the Angels were his Ministers had he been pleased to make use of their Service Matt. 26.53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father And he shall presently give me more than twelve Legions of Angels For what he said about his asking his Father for them was because he was then in a state of Humiliation He did not ask when he came attended with them at his giving of the Law on Mount Sinai nor when Isaiah saw his Glory in the Temple and heard them sing Holy Holy Holy They were then in their Duty which as the Jews understand their Prophets say is to adore the Messias Being brought before Caiaphas at whose House the Counsel of the Jews was met upon Caiaphas his adjuring him by the living God to tell them whether he was the Christ the Son of God Matth. xxvi 63. Jesus said unto him v. 64. Thou hast said Nevertheless I say unto you Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven Upon which he was condemned to dye as a Blasphemer From whence it appears what notion the Jews had of the Messias And that they believed that Son of man spoken of Dan. vii 13 14. to be the very Son of God who had a second Throne set for him and came with the Clouds of Heaven as God This being the ordinary description the Prophets make of him Being condemned as a Blasphemer for taking the Title of Jehovah and of the Son of God the People by way of mockery called him the King of the Jews the Son of God and Saviour which justified his Pretension Luke xxiii 35 36 37 38. And the people stood beholding and the rulers also with them derided him saying He saved others let him save himself if he be Christ the chosen of God And the Souldiers also said If thou be the King of the Jews save thy self And a superscription was written over him This is the King of the Jews And Matt. xxvii 39 40 41 42 43. They that passed by reviled him saying Save thy self If thou be the Son of God come down from the Cross Likewise also the Chief Priests said He saved others himself he cannot save If he be the King of Israel let him now come down from the Cross and we will believe him He trusted in God let him deliver him now if he will have him For he said I am the Son of God He cried upon the Cross with a loud voice Eli Eli Lamma sabachthani My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Mat. xxvii 46. These words are the beginning of the 22th Psalm and very agreeable to those words in Psal xlv where he that is God himself or the Psalmist for him does nevertheless call the Father his God saying O God thy God has anointed thee Accordingly the Centurion that guarded him having heard this Cry and also that with which he expired saying Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit said Truly this was the Son of God Mark xiv 39. After his Death his side was run through that the Scripture might be fulfilled Joh. xix 37. relating to that Prophecy Zech. xii 10. which the Ancient Jews understood of the Messias Breshit Rabba on Gen. xxviii and Rabbi Abenezra on this Text. And yet the words of that Prophecy come from the mouth of the Lord Jehovah Zech. xii 1 4. saying I will pour upon the House of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication and they shall look upon ME whom they have pierced and they shall mourn for him as one mourns for his only Son Being risen from the Dead the third day as he had foretold the Angel that gave the Women the first news of it called him Lord that is Jehovah Mat. xxviii 6. as the Angel had done who gave the Shepherds the tidings of his Birth Luk. ii 11. Soon after he appeared to his Disciples and did constitute them Heralds of the New Covenant which he had made with Mankind in his Blood of which Covenant Jehovah is said to be the Author Jer. xxxii 40. I will make an everlasting Covenant with them And I will put my fear in their hearts they shall not depart from me Afterwards he did promise to send them the Holy Ghost Luk. xxiv 46 47 48 49. He said to them Thus it is written and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day And that repentance and remission of sins should be preacht in his name among all Nations beginning at Jerusalem And ye are witnesses of these things And behold I send the promise of my Father upon you But tarry ye in the City of Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high Before his Ascension he gave them Symbolically the Holy Ghost which he was to send fully upon them forty days after Joh. xx 22. He breathed on them and said receive the Holy Ghost Thomas not being then present nor believing what others told him that they had seen the Lord Jesus Christ appear'd to him and so throughly satisfied him of the truth of his Resurrection that thereupon he remarkably owned him his Lord and his God v. 28. He bids them Baptize in the Name of the Trinity Mat. xxvii 18 19 20. All power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth Go ye therefore and teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you And lo I am with you always even unto the end of the World In which words he visibly relates to many Persons and where he represents himself as the Shekinah that was always with the people under his conduct Being ready to go up into Heaven he received their Adorations Luk. xxiv 51 52. While he blest them he was parted from them and carried up into Heaven And they worshipt him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy And St. John declares that the end for which he writ his Gospel was That we might believe that Jesus is Christ the Son of God and that believing we might have life through his Name Joh. xx 31. I thought it necessary thus in short to sum up the chief Particulars which the Four Evangelists have observed about the Life of our Saviour To shew plainly and briefly to the Reader that the Gospel follows the same Notions which the Old Testament had given of the Messias and which the Jews in Christ's days had generally received First That in the Divine Nature there is a Father a Son and a Holy Ghost Secondly That the Son which was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the promised Messias Thirdly That the Holy Ghost was to be given by the Messias and to come being sent both by the Father and the Son as the Son was sent
to St. Athanasius's meaning Jesus Christ himself speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he saith John v. 8. Ye have not the Word of God remaining in you And 't is true that it cannot be understood of the Law and Prophecy which St. Paul affirms to have been trusted to the Jewish Nation And 't is mighty probable that St. John taking the Shekinah and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the same saith that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an opposition to his Absence from the Jews who had rejected his direction and conduct I answer 3dly That many of the Ancient Doctors of the Church did remark that St. Luke Luk. i. 2. Acts i. and St. Paul Heb. iv 12. used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense to denote the Second Person of the Trinity and that therefore it was not peculiar to St. John to do so 4thly I say that the word Davar in the room of which the Jews since the Babylonian Captivity do ever use that of Memra to express the Second Person of the Trinity was in use even in David's time as appears by Psal xxxiii 6. where the LXX have render'd it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Version being common among the Jews and generally received St. John could not use a term more proper to express the Divinity of the Second Person taking our Nature upon him And if it is no matter of wonder that the other Evangelists should give to our Saviour the Name of the Messias or that of the Son of God which were first given him by David it ought to be none that St. John has given him that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which likewise was given him by David and does withal so well express the Author of the Creation who was this very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who said Let such or such a thing be and it was For which reason St. Paul says that God made the Worlds by him Heb. i. 2. and St. Peter 2 Epist chap. iii. 5. where he ascribes the Creation of the World to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word as it is acknowledged by Grotius The reason why St. John is more particular in his Expressions about the Second Person whom he makes to be the Creator of the Worlds and then represents as being made Man was because the other Evangelists had given so full an Account of his Birth and Genealogy and every thing else that was needful to prove the Truth of his Human Nature against the Simoniani and other Hereticks that would make him a Fantasm that this Evangelist found himself obliged to be the more express in asserting his Divinity against the Ebïonites who abused some places of the other Gospels to maintain that Christ was a mere Man and against the Cerinthians who affirmed that the Word was not inseparably united to the Flesh Lastly St. John used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to express the Unity of God tho there be Three Persons in the Divine Nature Therefore he says that the Word was with God and that he was God He observes that Christ said that he was in the Father and the Father in him That he and the Father were one as he had before express'd himself in his first Epist chap. v. 7. These Three are One to shew the Unity of the Divine Monarchy after the manner in which the Jews did apprehend it wherein he was followed by the first Christians Another Objection which seems very plausible and therefore is confidently made by the Socinians is grounded upon those places in the Jewish Writers where they attribute to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what is affirmed in Scripture to have been said or done by an Angel in very many Apparitions as Exod. iii. 2. and Acts vii 30. where St. Stephen after Moses affirms that the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in the bush In which places of Scripture a created Angel not the Son of God seems to have appeared to Moses Whereas the Jewish Writers take this Angel to have been the Word as I shewed before Which Mistake must invalidate their Testimony in this case Accordingly some Interpreters as Lorinus the Jesuit and others Papists suppose him to have been a created Angel but which represented the Person of the Son of God and therefore acted in his Name and spoke as if he had been the Lord himself This Opinion they ground upon two things First Because he is expresly distinguish'd from the Lord both by Moses and St. Stephen who call him the Angel of the Lord. And Secondly Because the Son of God never took upon him the Nature of Angels as he did that of Men and therefore can't be called by their Name This has been thoroughly considered before to which I might refer the Reader for an Answer But to save him trouble we shall here shew him reason enough to believe that those Texts speak of one that was more than a Creature First Because the Angel is presently named the Lord or Jehovah both by Moses and St. Stephen even as Gen. xxxi the Angel which wrestled with Jacob is called God Secondly Because he declared formally that he was the Lord when he said to Moses I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob which can never be said of a mere Creature under whatsoever Commission or Dignity The Prophets did formerly represent God and they acted as well as spake in his Name but for all this they never spoke as the Angel mentioned by St. Stephen They said barely Thus saith the Lord or Jehovah I am God c. Likewise Christ represented his Father as being his Ambassador and his Deputy and yet he never took the Name of Father We read of many Apparitions of Angels in the New Testament yet no man can pretend to shew that any of them either spoke or acted as God though sent by him and speaking to Men in his Name It had been as absurd and as great a crime for them to have done so as for a Viceroy to tell the People whom he is sent to govern I am your King tho' he does represent the King's Person It is true the Angel mentioned by St. Stephen is named the Angel of the Lord and as true that Christ did not take the nature of Angels on him He did this favour only to Men for them only he humbled himself and was made like them in all things sin excepted and for this reason he is truly named Man and the Son of Man as well as the Son of God For Apostate Angels he forsook them and left them for ever in their Rebellion But it must be observed that the word Angel signifies properly a Messenger and denotes rather the Office than the nature of those blessed Spirits sent forth to Minister And consequently their Name may well be given to the Son of God who ever had the care of the Church committed to him and by whom the Father
has communed with Man ever since his fall into sin Upon this Ground Malachi ch iii. v. 1. names the Son of God the Angel or Messenger of the Covenant Which Prophecy is owned to this day by the Jews to speak of the Messias Isaiah ch lxiii v. 9. names him the Angel of the Presence of the Lord who saved and redeemed the Israelites According to what the Lord said to Moses Exod. xxiii 23. My Angel shall go before thee And Exod. xxxiii 14. My presence shall go with thee The Primitive Christians never doubted but that the Angel which appeared to Moses in the Desart and guided the Israelites was the Son of God St. Paul says expresly thus much 1 Cor. x. 9. when he affirms that the Israelites tempted Christ in the Wilderness by their Rebellions Lorinus himself quoting some places from the most Ancient Fathers is forced to acknowledge it on Acts vii And I shewed before that St. Paul has affirmed nothing upon this Point but according to the common Notion of the Jews It ought not therefore to seem strange that St. Stephen does distinguish the Angel of whom he speaks from the Lord himself when he names him the Angel of the Lord For the Son is distinct from the Father and the Son was sent by the Father But because they so partake of the same Divine Nature that they are in reality but one and the same God blessed for ever the Son in this regard might well say I am the God of Abraham c. and be called the Lord Jehovah If it be askt why Moses did rather call him an Angel than otherwise I answer that he did so for these two reasons First because the distinction of the Divine Persons was not so clearly revealed under the Old Testament by reason that it did not so well suit that Oecomy Secondly because God since he created the World commonly imploying Angels in those works which were not above their power and capacity It may very well be that the Son of God when he appeared to Men used the Ministry of Angels either to form the voice and the words which he spoke to his Prophets or to make the Body or the Figure under which he appeared It is objected in the last place that St. Paul seems to suppose that an Angel gave the Law upon Mount Sinai and not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Son of God and that that Angel is called God because he spoke in God's Name Thus Gal. iii. 19. he says that the Law was ordained by Angels Heb. ii 2. that it was spoken by Angels And Heb. i. 1 2. making opposition between the Law and the Gospel he says to elevate this last above the former that God having formerly spoke to Men by his Prophets has in these last days spoken to us by his Son which could not be true if he had before made use of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give his Law to the Jews The Socinians look upon this Argument as unanswerable And the truth is it has imposed upon many Learned Writers as Lorinus Grotius and others But it will be no difficult business to answer it if it be observed First that it hath been always the opinion of the old Jews that the Law was given by Jehovah himself Secondly that it was likewise their opinion that Jehovah who gave the Law was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 3ly that 't is affirmed by Moses Deut. xxxiii 2. That when the Lord came from Sinai and rose up from Seir He came with ten thousands of Saints from his right hand went a fiery Law I say that 't is enough to prove those three things to convince any Man that when St. Paul says that the Law was spoken by Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he means only that they were present as witnesses where it was given not that they represented God's person The first appears by Philo who affirms that it was God who spoke when he gave the Law de Migrat Abrah p. 309. D. E. F. And de Decal p. 576. D. C. and p. 593. F. he spoke by a voice which he created And Lib. de Praem p. 705. The Targum affirms the same that Jehovah revealed himself with multitudes of Angels when he gave his Law 1 Chron. xxix 11. The second is clear by Hag. ii 6. where the Lord speaking of the time when he brought his People out of Egypt saith that he had shaken the Earth which relates to his giving the Law as appears from Psal lxviii 8. and Heb. xii 25 26. where St. Paul applies that place to our Saviour And it is acknowledged also by the Jews as the Author of Rabboth fol. 135. col 3. Onkelos Deut. iv 33 36. the People heard the voice of the Word of the Lord out of the fire And also Deut. v. 24. And likewise Exod. xx 7. Deut. v. 11. and vi 13. where the third Commandment is mentioned in these words None shall swear by the Name of the Word of the Lord. The third Point is evident according to the constant Maxim of the Jews that the Shekinah or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is always accompanied with several Camps of Angels who attend him and execute his Judgments Those things being noted I maintain that when St. Paul saith that the Law hath been Ordained by Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. iii. 19. the Text must be rendred between Angels as St. Paul hath used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Tim. ii 2. not to say by many Witnesses but among or before many Witnesses 2ly That when St. Paul speaks Heb. ii of the Word that hath been spoken by Angels he doth not speak of the Law but of the several threatnings which were made by the Prophets to whom the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sent his Angels to bring back the People of Israel from their wickedness And of the several punishments which fell upon Israel and were inflicted by Angels as Executors of the judgment of God It must be understood so necessarily or it is impossible to save St. Paul from having contradicted himself in the same Epistle For he supposeth ch xii 25 26. that 't was Jesus Christ that being the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shook the Earth in which he follows the words of Haggai the Prophet and of the Psalmist Psal lxviii 8. and who can reconcile that with St. Paul saying that many Angels Ordained the Law Did they all personate God in that occasion No body hath ever imagined such a thing It cannot be objected to me that St. Paul opposes the Person of Jesus to Moses as it hath been done by St. John ch i. where he saith that the Law was given by Moses but Grace and Truth by Jesus Christ The reason is clear and it is because he opposes the Ministry of Reconciliation to the Ministry of Condemnation Moses hath been the Mediator of the first Covenant but Jesus Christ is the Minister of the second although both
Ministries were originally from God I need not spend much time to confute the fancy of those who say that the Angel of the Lord is named Jehovah because he was Jehovah's Ambassador For it is a Notion which the Unitarians have borrowed from the Modern Jews such as Menasseh Ben Isr in Gen. i. 44. But I have fully proved that it is a new Notion forged by them to save their new System It is so certain that the Old Jews believed that an Angel could not say I am Jehovah as we read Exod. xx that even the Talmudists affirm that Jehovah himself spoke these words I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt Though they say that the rest of the Law was spoken by Moses Shir. Hashirin Rabba fol. 5. col 1. CHAP. XXIII That neither Philo nor the Chaldee Paraphrasts nor the Christians have borrowed from the Platonick Philosophers their Notions about the Trinity But that Plato should have more probably borrowed his Notions from the Books of Moses and the Prophets which he was acquainted with HAving in the foregoing Chapters shewn that the Doctrine of the Trinity has its Ground in the Writings of Moses and the Prophets and that the ancient Jews before Christ did acknowledge it as appears from many places in the Apocryphal Authors in Philo and the Chaldee Paraphrasts who were exactly followed by Christ his Apostles and the Primitive Christians It may be seen how falsly the Socinians pretend that Justin Martyr was the Author of the Doctrine of the Trinity But to put them altogether from this Evasion I will shew that nothing can be more absurd than to say that if Philo was not a Christian he was at least a Platonist and that the Fathers particularly Justin Martyr brought into the Christian Religion a Doctrine which they borrowed from Plato As to Philo's being a Platonist I say first that though this were granted yet it would do the Unitarians no good The reason is because whatever Notions the Greeks had of Divine matters they had from Pherecides a Syrian who lived a long time before Plato and was Pythagoras's Master Pythagoras who afterwards was much followed by the Greeks travelled into Egypt into Arabia and into Chaldea after he had had Pherecides to his Master Plotinus does ingenuously confess that the three Original Hypostases were not of Plato's inventions but were known before him and this he makes out from Parmenides his Writings who had treated of this Notion Plot. Enn. 5. Lib. 1. Now Parmenides had the Notion of the Trinity from the Pythagoreans whose Master Pythagoras had probably borrowed it from the Jews with whom he conversed in Egypt Secondly I own that Philo was compared by many with Plato as to his Stile and that lively Eloquence for which Plato was so admired One may see by his Book Quod omnis probus sit Liber and many other of his Works that he was very conversant in these Greek Authors both Poets and Philosophers But he had been so little acquainted with Plato's Works that he brings some of Plato's opinion upon the credit of Aristotle We see that in his Book Quod mundus sit p. 728 729. He never proves his Doctrines by the Authority of Plato He Grounds all he says upon the Divine Authority speaking in the Old Testament well reflected upon as you see p. 288. where he speaks of the Three who appeared to Abraham A Jew as he was could not well have suited his Notions with Plato's For Plato believed for instance That Matter was Eternal and uncreated which is positively contrary to what Moses says of the Creation of the World and as positively rejected by Philo in his Books of Providence and that Matter had a Beginning As to the Doctrine of the Trinity Plato speaks of it so obscurely that one may justly wonder how some Christians formerly made use of his Testimony to prove it Probably he had heard of it in Egypt But what he says about it in his Parmenides though quoted by Eusebius shews that he had not a very true Notion of it He speaks of an Eternal and unbegotten Being He attributes to that Being which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a first Understanding and a first Life And Proclus does distinguish those three Principles of Plato as three different Beings But Plotinus does not agree in this with Proclus and affirms that these Three are but one and the same thing The reason why many Christians have so much esteemed Plato is the nobleness of his Morals the Maxims of which are much more elevated and Christian-like than those of other Heathen Philosophers It is true Philo seems to have followed Plato's Expressions when he calls the Word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a second God But it must be observed First that Philo never owns above one God And secondly that he used that expression to mark the distinction which is between Jehovah and Jehovah as I shewed already Let the thing be considered in its self It is certain that the Notion of the Trinity cannot be had from Reason It must therefore be a Doctrine either revealed by God or devised by Plato or some other from whom he received it But the Platonists are so far from believing their Master to be the first inventer of it that Proclus affirms it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a piece of Divinity delivered by God himself And Numenius a famous Platonist who lived under the two Antonines and was therefore Justin's Contemporary expresly maintains that Plato during his thirteen years stay in Egypt had learnt the Doctrine of the Hebrews as Theodoret tells us in his first Sermon against the Greeks For it is certain that many Jews fled into Egypt after Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and after the death of Gedaliah These two Testimonies are enough to prove that Plato was not the first Inventer of the Notion of a Trinity And that Philo borrowed not his Notions from Plato may further appear because Philo lived at a time when Plato's Philosophy had long ago lost much of its credit Aristotle did much lessen it But it was much more crest-fallen when the opinions of Zeno and Epicurus prevailed Zeno's Philosophy spread it self as far as Rome although the Maxims of it were barbarous and unnatural And in St. Paul's days that of Epicurus was much followed at Athens That of the Pyrrhonians got much Ground likewise So that Plato had but a very few Disciples left him In Plato's days there started up at Alexandria a Sect of Philosophers the Head of whom was one Polemo who lived under Augustus These freely rejected the most famous Opinions and pickt out what they found most rational in the several Sects of Philosophers for which reason they were called Electicks or Chusers And one needs but read Philo with Judgment to find that he followed this Sect. It appears that Philo's great design in all his Works is to shew That the Jews were infinitely
above the Heathens both as to Virtue and Knowledge In which he followed Aristobulus's Notions who had writ long before him and was a Jewish Philosopher And of this Opinion the Jews are to this day as may be seen in Cozri p. 29 and p. 131. And as the Egyptians lookt upon the Greeks as Children in learning which they were fain to fetch from Egypt so Philo calls often the Egyptians even of the most ancient times a heavy People and who wanted common Sense by reason of the many gross Errors they entertain'd unworthy of rational Creatures In a word I affirm that if Plato had any distinct Notions in Religion he most certainly had them from the Jews while he sojourned in Egypt as it is maintained by Josephus in his first Book against Appion As for the Chaldee Paraphrasts I do not see how they can be suspected to have had a Tincture of Plato's Doctrine It must be a mere Fancy to suppose it Let those Gentlemen read exactly the Books of Philo and find therein if they can such an Expression as we have in the Targum upon Hag. ii 4 5. I am with you saith the Lord of Hosts with the Word which covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt and my Spirit which abideth in the midst of you M. N. hath been sensible of that and therefore he does not accuse them of having been Platonists but he accuses the Orthodox Christians in general to have inserted in the Jewish Books whatever in them is favourable to the Doctrines of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But certainly the Unitarians must have very little Correspondence with the Jews to fancy that they are so simple as to be thus abused How can it be imagined that the Jews should be such Friends to Christians as to trust them with their Books in order to falsify them And afterwards so sottish as to spread every where their Books and their Targums which they falsified This Supposition is so ridiculous that I cannot imagine how any Author can write such a thing or even conceive and suppose it What I said of the Gospel Notions in the 15th Chapter shews plainly that neither Christ nor his Apostles did adopt the System of Philosophy which was taught by the Platonists The Angel who declared his Conception used the word Lord or Jehovah to denote his being God But when he named him Jesus because he was to save his People from their sins which no other could do but God he intimated that it was he who was foretold not by Plato but by Habakkuk chap. iii. 8 13 18. I will rejoice in the Lord I will joy in the God of my salvation In which place the Prophet expresly calls God Saviour or Jesus by which Name Christ by Divine Appointment was named In short a man must be out of his Senses to find any thing in the Gospel that savours of Plato's Hypothesis When the Devils own Christ to be the Son of God were they Platonists When St. Peter owns him to be the Son of God had Plato told him this When he was ask'd in the Council of the Jews whether he was the Son of God was the question made in a Platonick sense It is true St. Paul has sometimes quoted Heathenish Authors he was brought up at Tarsus amongst Heathens he had read Aratus whom he quotes against the Epicurean Philosophers at Athens and he quotes a place out of the Cretan Epimenides in his Epistle to Titus who was Bishop of Crete But we never find that he quoted Plato or used his Testimony Christ chose illiterate men for his Apostles St. John who speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been a Fisherman about the Lake of Tiberias St. Paul only and St. Luke were Scholars St. Paul was brought up under Gamaliel a Doctor of the Law and St. Luke who had been a Physician and was a Learned Man followed St. Paul in his Travels and by his directions writ his Gospel But it does not appear that our Saviour taught his ignorant Disciples the Notions of Plato nor that the Learned ones as St. Paul and St. Luke ever used Plato's Authority in their Preaching This appears plainly in the Book of the Acts in which St. Luke gives an account of it If at any time St. Paul had a fair opportunity to make use of Plato's Testimony it was when he disputed at Athens against the Stoicks and the Epicureans These last laughing at Miracles St. Paul wrought none there to convince them But he might have quoted places out of Plato's Republick to prove the Resurrection and a Judgment in the Life to come yet he quotes never an Author and was contented to argue the Case by strength of Reason and this he did with that force that he converted one of the Judges of Areopagus who probably was an Epicurean and knew what Plato said in his Books and did laugh at it This Method of the Apostles was followed by the first Christians Plato was not mentioned amongst them till some Philosophers turned Christians Justin Martyr amongst others This Justin scorned all other Philosophers as mean-spirited Teachers but commended Plato as being one of a great Genius that made him think of God and the Immortality of the Soul in a more elevated manner than other Philosophers But when all is done How much did he value Plato But indifferently He declares that it was from the Gospel together with the Law and the Prophets that he had the true Notions of the Christian Religion He quotes Plato neither against the Heathens nor against the Jews If we had the Book he writ against Marcion who out of Plato's Writings had broach'd his detestable Opinions we might very probably have seen how little he valued Plato's Authority Tertullian who had read Justin's Book and who saw that both the Gnosticks and the Valentinians made much of Plato's Authority shews plainly how little he valued Plato when he says he was grown omnium haereticorum condimentarium the sawce which all Hereticks used to propagate their Doctrines by which they corrupted the Purity of the Christian Religion And much the same Opinion of Plato had they that opposed the Arian Heresy of which it is thought Origen was the first Broacher However I aver First That the first Christians were no more Platonists than the Jews that is did not use Plato's Notions in their System of Divinity They were so far from it that they declared that what they believed about the Trinity they had it from the Holy Writers Justin Apol. 2. Athenagoras p. 8 9. Theophilus of Antioch p. 100. Secondly It is false that any of the Ancient Christians made any other use of Plato than by shewing that Plato had borrowed from Moses the Doctrine he taught Justin in his Exhortation to the Greeks p. 18 22 24. Clemens of Alexandria Strom. l. 4. p. 517. and l. 5. p. 598. Paedag. l. 1. c. 6. Origen against Celsus l.
thou Bethlehem Ephratah though thou be little among the thousands 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 of old from everlasting The Jews can't deny this But then to evade what is there spoken of his Eternity they pretend it means no more than his descent from David as if the distance of time from David to Jesus Christ could be called Eternity This is the way Manasseh ben Israel q. 5. on Micah takes to get over this difficulty Before him others took another way and affirmed that God decreed before the Creation of the World to send the Messias and that in this respect it is said in Micah that his goings forth are from the days of eternity Jeremy ch xxiii 26. saith very expresly that the Messias shall be called the Jehovah our Righteousness and he repeats the same ch xxxiii 15 16. In those days and at that time will I cause the Branch of Righteousness to grow up unto David and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the Land In those days shall Judah be saved and Jerusalem shall dwell safely And this is the Name wherewith he shall be called The Lord our Righteousness R. David Kimchi owns it and quotes the Authority of two Eminent Rabbins for it namely R. Aba Bar Caana and R. Levi in Eccha Rabati But they will none of them own that this Name Jehovah belongs any otherwise to him than it doth to the Ark which is altogether impertinent for the Ark is never called Jehovah nor doth Menasseh prove that it is with all his talking q. 18. in Isaiah Jonathan as well as Philo ascribes to the Messias the Prophecies Zech. vi 12 13. And so Jonathan applies to the Messias what is said in the same Prophet But many of the Modern Jews among whom R. Salomon is one do refer them to Zorobabel These several places I have now mentioned may serve as a Sample of the confusion the Jews are in while they attempt to interpret the ancient Prophecies and I may confidently affirm that all those other places which I have omitted that intimate a Trinity or the Divinity of the Messias or the time when he should come into the World are in like manner explained so very triflingly and forcedly as that oftentimes their own Authors convinced by the Evidence of the Texts themselves have refuted them and given a new Interpretation of them Whence it comes to pass that their Reader can find no certain sense of those Texts to rest on but his understanding continues in an entire darkness and unsetledness This ill luck they have of Explications is not of yesterday as I have already observed Soon after Jesus Christ's time they set themselves to oppose what the Christians held of the two Comings of the Messias though so distinctly described one of them Zech. ix 9. and the other Dan. vii 13. And still to this day do they reject that Notion of his two Comings as may be seen in Menass on Zech. ix p. 185. But others of them who found it impossible to deny that the Scripture speaks of two Comings of the Messias whom they expected thought it better to make two Messias's than to acknowledg that the Messias whom they expected was to be a suffering Messias And thus they thought they removed the difficulties in the other opinion that made but one Coming of the Messias by owning the Messias the Son of Joseph should be a Man of sorrows but Messias the Son of David was to be a Glorious Deliverer As the Jews Disputes with the Christians encreased they advanced certain Characters of the Times of the Messias and all of them very miraculous which they inferred from some Allegorical Descriptions in the Prophets concerning the Times of the Messias These they run up to ten as we see in Shemoth Rabba Parascha 15. And they make a great use of those Miracles which they conceive should have been in the time of Jesus Christ if he had been the true Messias Notwithstanding all which Menasse q. 7. on Isaiah finds himself obliged to assure us that David Kimchi and Abarbanel and many Interpreters explain most of these passages as Allegorical Descriptions of the Times of the Messias And Maimonides is of this opinion that when the Messias comes there shall be no change in the Order of Nature Jad Chaz Lib. de Regibus And in that he follows the opinion of one Rabbi Samuel that is quoted in the Talmud Tit. Beracoth where he saith that there shall be not any difference between the Times of the Messias and the other Times of the World but the subduing of the Kingdoms by the Messias To conclude the Jews being so often deceived in their Expectations of the Messias and finding themselves abused by a great number of false pretenders to that Character have almost lost their hopes of his Coming And finding his Coming to be a thing uncertain few of them do regard the Promise of the Messias with that assurance with which the Ancients did expect it Indeed it is observable that though Maimonides professes to own the Messias and hath inserted the hope of it among the Articles of the Jewish Faith which he hath given us yet he otherwhere speaks very indifferently of it In one place he asserts the observation of Moses's Law and the recompenses annexed to it to be the chief end of the Jews enquiry and not the time of the Messias's appearance as we are informed by the Author of the Chain of the Cabala The same judgment may be made of Joseph Albo who writ with great bitterness against the Christians For 1. he maintains in his Book of the Principles that R. Hillel was no Apostate though he denied the coming of any other Messias but of Hezekiah who was already come And Albo gives this reason for it because the Coming of the Messias is no Fundamental Article of the Jewish Religion Orat. 1. chap. 1. Nothing can be more wretched than this excuse of his For if the Messias had come before the Babylonian Captivity as R. Hillel would have it in the Person of King Hezekiah and if no other was to be expected why did the Jewish Church take those Books into her Bible that were written by the Prophets that lived under the second Temple and why did not R. Hillel and his Followers declare against them as false Prophecies that spoke of the Messias as being yet to come namely Zechary Haggai and Malachy who did all Prophecy of the Messias as has been abundantly shewn with Proofs out of the Targums of those Books and the general consent of Jewish Writers 2. The same Albo is not afraid to assert That the Article of the Messias has no other foundation than the authority of Tradition For saith he there is not any Prophecy either in the Law or in the Prophets that foretells his Coming by any necessary Exposition of it with respect to
but God only adding that the Holy Writers of the New Testament in applying them to Jesus Christ turned these Texts to quite another sense than was intended by the Holy Spirit at the inditing of them The Prophet Isaiah again has these words ch xxxv 4 5 6. Behold your God will come and save you c. Sal Jarchi and D. Kimchi expound them of the Deliverance from Babylon contrary to the ancient Jews opinion who as these Rabbins confess understood them of the Messias The Socinians will not deny that Jesus Christ assumed them to himself but to shew how little ground he had for so doing they insist on it that he only accommodated the words to himself The same Isaiah writes thus ch xli 4. I am the first and the last and Jesus Christ has the same expressions of himself Rev. i. 17. The Chaldee Paraphrast thought they belonged so properly to the True God as to Paraphrase them in this manner I am the Lord Jehovah who created the World in the beginning and the Ages to come are all mine Joseph Albo makes this Text a proof of the Eternity of God and notes that it is a parallel Text to Isa xliv 6. But if you 'l have Socinus opinion of the place when it is applied to our Lord Jesus Christ it does not at all regard his Eternity Once more we read Isa xlv 23. I have sworn by my self the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness that unto me every knee shall bow every tongue shall swear St. Paul refers these words to Jesus Christ Rom. xiv 11. nay he proves our standing before Christ's Judgment-seat by this Quotation Notwithstanding the Socinians believe them only a simple accommodation and not the prime scope of the Text. I know the Apostles have sometimes cited Texts from the Old Testament which have not their exact accomplishment in that sense wherein they are used As for example 2 Cor. viii 15. St. Paul exhorting the Corinthians to supply the wants of their Brethren with their abundance addeth As it is written He that had gathered much had nothing over and he that had gathered little had no lack Thus alluding to the History of the Manna Exod. xvi 18. it is plain that he accommodates that Story to the Beneficence of the Christians without any thing either from Letter or Allegory to justifie this accommodation They who think that John ch xix 37. does allude to Exod. xii 46. Neither shall you break a bone thereof go upon this ground that Christ was typified by the Paschal Lamb and therefore what was spoken of the Paschal Lamb is truly applicable to Christ But some others believe that St. John cited this passage from Psal xxxiv 21. and applies what David saith of all the just in general to the Messias who is often called the Just One as being eminently so I know that some think that a Prophecy which has been already accomplish'd literally was accommodated by the Holy Penmen to a like event And thus they think St. Matthew ch ii 17. applies the voice that was heard at Ramah and Rachel's weeping for her Children to those Expressions of sorrow used by the Women of Bethlehem when Herod slew their Children Although this Prophecy was before accomplished in the Captivity of Judah and Benjamin under Nebuchadnezzar But besides what I have said upon such places the Examples of this nature are but few and those may be easily discerned by a careful Reader from such Citations as are not Accommodations but Proofs and for the Texts which are commonly and generally quoted by the Holy Writers they expose the Books of the New Testament to the scorn and contempt of Jews who suppose that the Apostles went about to make Converts from the Synagogue by such passages of the Old Testament as had nothing of strength or reason to convince any Man for such are the places quoted by way of Accommodation and let any one but consult the Writings of the Jews against Christianity and he will find that the main Argument they make use of against the Proofs brought by the Apostles is that the passages they cite were never designed by the Spirit to that purpose Literally taken but were only made use of by them by way of Accommodation But the most wonderful thing of all in the Unitarians management of this Controversie especially in our English Unitarians is this that they do not only side with the Jews and dress up their sense of those Texts of the Old Testament which are cited in the New as Proofs of our Lords Divinity or which are objected in confirmation of the Holy Trinity and that they have not been content to bring in the Notion of Accommodation to elude the force of those Quotations on which the Apostles grounded several Doctrines but for the most part they give broad intimations as if the New Testament Writings were on purpose falsified by the Christians and many things there inserted which were never thought of by the Authors of those Writings If they could have made good this accusation it would have saved them a great deal of pains which it has cost them to find out Answers to the several Objections proposed to them 'T is the most easie natural and shortest way to joyn with the Deists in destroying the Authority of the Gospel and to endeavour to shew that nothing certain can be drawn from thence seeing that since the Apostles Times the Christian Faith hath been corrupted and new Doctrines have been foisted into their Books which from the beginning were not there For my part I see no other way left them for the defence of their bad Cause But by ill luck Socinus has stopped their retreat even to this last Refuge by the Treatise he writ concerning the Authority of the Holy Scriptures When they have solidly refuted this Book of their great Leader it will be then time to take their Charge against the Sacred Books into more particular consideration Let them do this when they will We promise them when they have done it to reproach them no more with Socinus's Authority in defence of the Integrity of the Scripture But for the present we refer them to the Book of a famous Mahometan called Hazzadaula who has handled this matter with length and force enough to confound both the Unitarians and Deists I mean his third Book of the comparison of the three Laws the Jewish Christian and Mahometan of which there is an Extract in Jos de Voisin de Lege Divina in a Letter from Gabriel Syonita It has been thought by some that Mahomet and his Followers did accuse the Jews and Christians of corrupting the Old and New Testament Writings But we see this Accusation is proved false by such as have managed the Controversie against Mahometanism And the more knowing Mahometans do insult the Christian Missionaries for charging it on them when Mahomet accused the Christians only for wresting several passages in Scripture and putting a false
by what the Apostle saith Joh. xii 41. that this was no other than our Lord Jesus Christ For there the Apostle having quoted the words that Isaiah heard from the Lord that spoke to him Isai vi 9 10. tells us These things said Isaiah when he saw his Glory and spoke of him That the Apostle here speaks of the Word made flesh is clear enough from the Text. But besides it has been proved by our Writers beyond all contradiction See Plac. lib. ii Disput 1. In like manner that which the Prophet Ezekiel saw was an Appearance of God represented to him as a Man sitting on a Throne of Glory Ezek. i. 26 27 28. x. 1. Which Throne was then upon Wheels after the manner of a Sella Curulis They were living Wheels animated and supported by Cherubims i. 21. each of which had four Faces i. 6. such as were carved on the Walls of the Temple xli 19. In short that which Ezekiel saw though he was then in Chaldea was nothing else but the Appearance of God as yet dwelling in his Temple at Jerusalem but quite weary of it and now about to remove and to leave his dwelling-place to be destroyed by the Chaldeans To shew that this was the meaning of it he saw this Glorious Appearance of God first in his place iii. 12. i. e. on the Mercy-seat in the Temple ix 3. Next he saw him gone from his place to the Threshold of the House Judges use to give Judgment in the Gate so there over the Threshold of his House God gave Sentence against his rebellious people v. 5 6 7. Afterward from the Threshold of the House x. 4. the Prophet saw the Glory departed yet farther and mounted up from the Earth over the midst of the City x. 18 19. And lastly he saw it go from thence and stand upon the Mountain on the East-side of the City xi 23. That is on Mount Olivet which is before Jerusalem on the East Zech. xiv 4. and so the Targum has it on this place After this departure of the Divine Presence Ezekiel saw his forsaken Temple and City destroyed and his People carried away into Captivity xxxiii 21 c. After this he saw no more Appearance of God till his People's return from Captivity And then the Temple being rebuilt according to the measures given from God xl xli xlii the Prophet could not but expect that God would return to it as of old So he saw it come to pass in his Vision xliii 2. Behold the Glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the East where the Prophet saw it last at M. Olivet So again v. 4. The Glory of the Lord came into the House by the way of the Gate whose prospect is toward the East And v. 5. Behold the Glory of the Lord filled the House So again xliv 4. It filled the House now as it had done in Solomon's time 1 King viii 11. All along in this Prophecy of Ezekiel it was but one Person that appeared from the beginning to the end In the beginning of this Prophecy it was God that appeared in his Temple over the Cherubims and there we find him again in the end of this Prophecy But that it was no other but the Word that so appeared in the Temple according to the sense of the ancient Jewish Church has been proved so fully out of their Targums elswhere that we need not trouble our selves about that any farther though we cannot find it in the Targum on this Book In the Books of Chronicles there is nothing remarkable of this kind but what has been considered already in the account that we have given of the Divine Appearances in the Books of Kings And there is no mention of any such Appearance in any of the other Books that were written after the Babylonian Captivity except on the Books of Daniel and Zechariah Of Daniel the Jews have not given us any Targum therefore we have nothing to say of that Book They have given us a Targum such as it is of the Book of Zechariah which is the last we have to consider In this Book of Zechariah we read of three Angels that appeared to the Prophet The first appeared to him as a Man i. 8 -10. But is called an Angel v. 9. In Zechary's words The Angel that talked with me By which Title he is often distinguisht from all others in the same Book i. 13 14 19. ii 3. v. 5 6. vi 4. A second Angel appeared to him also as a Man with a Measuring Line in his hand ii 1. But whosoever compares this Text with Ezek. xl 3 4 5 c. will find that this who appeared as a Man was truly an Angel of God Next the first Angel going forth from the place where he appeared ii 3. Another Angel comes to meet him and bids him Run speak to this young man whether to the Angel Surveyor or whether to Zechary himself and tell him Jerusalem shall be inhabited c. ii 4. He that commands another should be his Superior And yet this Superior owns himself sent from God But he own'd it in such terms as shew'd that he was God himself This the Reader will see more than once in his speech which is continued from v. 4. to the end of the Chapter It appears especially in v. 8 9 11. of this Chapter First in v. 5. having declared what God would do for Jerusalem in these words according to the Targum The Lord hath said my Word shall be a wall of fire about her and my Glory will I place in the midst of her He goes on to v. 8. and there he delivers a Message from God to his People in these words Thus saith the Lord of Hosts After the Glory * After the Glory of his Shekinah being returned into the Temple when that was rebuilt they should soon after see Babylon it self taken and spotled by their ancient Servants the Persians hath he sent me to the Nations that spoiled you c. Here the sense is ambiguous for it seems strange that the Lord of Hosts should say another hath sent me But so it is again and much clearer exprest in v. 9. where he saith Behold I will shake my hand upon them and they shall be a spoil to their Servants This none but God could say But he addeth in the next words And ye shall know that the Lord of Hosts hath sent me which words plainly shew that though he stiled himself God yet he came as a Messenger from God This is plainer yet v. 11. where he saith Many Nations shall be joyned to the Lord in that day and shall be my people and I will dwell in the midst of thee Thee Thou Thee are all Feminines in the Hebrew and therefore all three refer to Zion Thee Oh Zion v. 10. This again none but God could say And yet it followeth Thou Oh Zion shalt know that the Lord of Hosts hath sent
me to Thee Oh Zion Here are plainly two Persons called by the name of Jehovah namely one that sends and another that is sent So that this second Person is God and yet he is also the Messenger of God So likewise in the next Chapter v. 1. the Angel that used to talk with the Prophet shewed him Joshua the High Priest standing before the Angel of the Lord and Satan standing over against Joshua as his Adversary And v. 2. the Prophet hears the Lord say unto Satan twice over The Lord rebuke thee for being so maliciously bent against Joshua that was come out of the Captivity as a brand pluckt out of the fire He that was called the Angel v. 1. is here called the Lord v. 2. and this Lord intercedes with the Lord for his Protection of Joshua against Satan That which gave the Devil advantage against Joshua was his Sins which as the Targum saith were the Marriages of his Sons to strange Wives His Sins whatsoever they were are here called filthy Garments and Joshua standing in these before the Angel v. 3 4. The Angel commands them that stood about him saying take away the filthy garments from him Here again by commanding the Angels he sheweth himself their Superior Afterward when the filthy Cloaths were taken off this Angel saith to Joshua Behold I have caused thy Iniquity to pass from thee words that if one Man had said to another the Jews would have accounted Blasphemy Mat. ix 2 3. For who say they can forgive Sins but God only But here was one that exercised that Authority over the High Priest himself This could be no other than he that was called of God a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek Psal cx 4. of whom the Jewish High Priest even Joshua himself was but a figure But he goes farther adding I will cloth thee with change of raiment that is according to the Targum I will cloth thee with righteousness ver 5. And he * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he said Jon. Targ. said again commanding the Angels Let them set a fair Miter on his head and they did so and clothed him with Garments and the Angel of the Lord stood by Here again he is called an Angel at last as he was at first ii 3. It is an Angel's Office to be the Messenger of God and so he often owned himself to be in saying The Lord sent me And yet this Messenger of God commands the Angels ii 4. iii. 4 5. and himself stands by to see them do his commands v. 5. This Angel calleth Israel his People and saith he will dwell among them ii 10 11. He takes upon him to protect his People v. 5. and to avenge them on their enemies v. 10. He intercedes with God iii. 2. He forgives sin and confers Righteousness iii. 4. If all these things cannot be truly said of one and the same Person then here are two Chapters together that are each of them half Nonsense and there is no way to reconcile them with sense but by putting some kind of force upon the Text whether by changing the words Socin in Wiek 1. ii p. 565. or by putting in other words as Socinus honestly confesseth he has done in his Interpretation And he saith they must do it that will make sense of the words It is certain they must do so that will interpret the words as he would have it But he and his followers bring this necessity upon themselves They that will set up new Opinions must defend them with new Scriptures For our parts we change nothing in the words and in our way of understanding them we follow the Judgment of the ancient Jewish Church that makes all these things perfectly agree to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This we see in Philo who often calleth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * De Somn. p. 466. B. Eus praep vii 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo L. 1. Quaest Sol. as Philo calls the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De migr Abr. p. 416. B. 418. C. Quis rer Divin haeres B. p. 397. G. De Somn. p. 457. B. Quod Deus sit immut p. 249. B. Quis rer Divin haer p. 397. G. God and yet as often calleth him an †De Somn. p. 463. F. De Prof. p. 364. B. Angel the Messenger of God and ‖ our High-Priest and * De profug 466. B. De Somniis p. 594. E. Quis rer Divin p. 397. G. Vit. Mos iii. p. 521. B. our Mediator with God The same hath been shewed of the Word elswhere out of the Targums And here in this Targum though no doubt it hath been carefully purged yet by some oversight it is said ii 5. That the Word shall be a wall of fire about Jerusalem And if the Modern Jews had not changed the third Person into the first it would have followed that his Shekinah should be in the midst of her as himself saith afterward v. 10 11. He would dwell in the midst of her meaning in the Temple where the Word of God had his dwelling-place always before its destruction as has been abundantly shewn in this Chapter and as we shewed from Ezekiel it was promised he should dwell there again after its Restauration CHAP. XVI That the Ancient Jews did often use the Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word in speaking of the Messias I Hope what I have said upon the Appearances of the Word in the Old Testament proves beyond exception that the Word which is spoken of in the ancient Books of the Jews is a Person and a Divine one From thence it is natural to conclude that St. John and the other Holy Writers of the New Testament who made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could not rationally give to that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any other Idea than that which was commonly received in the Jewish Nation Nothing more can be required from me than to refute fully the Unitarians who pretend that the Word signifies no more than an Attribute or the eternal vertue of God and who to confirm this assertion of theirs observe that in the Targums the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never employed when they speak of the Messias The Socinian Author who wrote against Wecknerus insists very much upon this observation Let us therefore examine how true that is which he affirms and supposing it true how rational the consequence is which he draws from thence in opposition to it I lay down these three Propositions which I shall consider in as many Chapters The first is that in several places of the Ancient Jewish Authors the Memra or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for the Messias And so that it is certain that St. John hath followed the Language of the Jews before Jesus Christ in taking the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a Divine Person that in the fulness of time as it was foretold