that is to say he lived in the reign of Herod the Great about thirty years before the Birth of our Lord. And some Criticks believe our Saviour does cite his Chaldee Paraphrase Luc. iv 18. in quoting the Text Isa lx 2. Thus much may at least be said for it that all that which is there cited does agree better with his Targum than with the Original Text. Onkelos a Proselyte was he according to their common account who turned the five Books of Moses into Chaldee This Work is rather a pure simple Translation than a Paraphrase notwithstanding it must be allowed that in divers places he does not endeavour so much to give us the Text word for word as to clear up the sense of certain places which otherwise could not well be understood by the people This Onkelos according to the common opinion of the Jews saw Jonathan and lived in the time of that ancient Gamaliel who was Master of the Apostle St. Paul as some would have it We find in Megillah c. 1. that he Composed his Targum under the Conduct of R. Eliezer and of R. Josua after the year of our Lord 70 and that he died in the year of our Lord 108 and that his Targum was immediately received into the publick use of the Jews what other Targums there were on the five Books of Moses having almost wholly lost their credit and their authority As to the other Sacred Books which the Jews call Cetouvim or Hagiographes they ascribe the Targums of the Psalms the Proverbs and Job to R. Joseph Caeeus and affirm that he lived a long time after Onkelos And for the Targums of the other Books they look on them as works of Anonymous Authors However the most part of these Targums have been Printed under the name of Jonathan as if he had been Author of them all There are moreover some scraps of a Paraphrase upon the five Books of Moses which is called the Jerusalem Targum and there is another that bears the name of Jonathan upon the Pentateuch and which some Learned Jews have said to be his As doth R. Azaria Imrebinah c. 25. and the Author of the Chain of Tradition p. 28. after R. Menahem de Rekanati who cites it under the name of Jonathan following some Ancient MSS. These Targums ordinarily exceed the bounds of a Paraphrase and enter into Explications some of which are strange enough and appear to be the work of divers Commentators who among some good things have very often mixed their own idle Fancies and Dreams Beckius nineteen years ago published a Paraphrase on the two Books of Chronicles of which also there is a MSS. at Cambridge This deserves almost the same Character with these Paraphrases I spoke of last For the Author of this as well as those before mentioned does often intermingle such Explications as taste of the Commentator with those which appear to have been taken from the Ancient Perushim or Explications of the most Eminent Authors of the Synagogue A Man must be mighty credulous if he gives credit to all the fables which the Jews bring in their Talmud to extoll the authority of Jonathan his Targum and he must have read these Pieces with very little attention or judgment who should maintain that they are entirely and throughout the Works of the Authors whose names they bear or that they are of the same antiquity in respect of all their parts Onkelos is so simple that it seems nothing or very little has been added to him and he has been in so great esteem among the Jews that they have commonly inserted his Version after the Text of Moses verse for verse in the Ancient Manuscripts of the Pentateuch And from thence we may judge if there is any ground for the Conjecture of some Jews who would persuade us that it is only an Abridgment of the Targum of Jonathan upon the Pentateuch Certainly Jonathan his Targum upon the Pentateuch must be of a very dubious origin since we see that the Zohar cites from it the first words which are not to be found in it but in the Targum of Jerusalem fol. 79. col 1. l. 17. It is uncertain if the Targum of Jerusalem hath been a continued Targum or only the Notes of some Learned Jew upon the Margent of the Pentateuch or an abridgment of Onkelos for it hath a mixture of Chaldaick Greek Latin and Persian words which sheweth it hath been written in latter times according to the judgment of R. Elias Levita Jonathan who explained the former and the latter Prophets has not been so happy as Onkelos for it seems those that Copied his Targum have added many things to it some of which discover their Authors to have lived more than 700 years after him one may also see there a medly of different Targum of which the Targum on Isai xlix is a plain instance As to the Targums on all the other Holy Books which the Jews call the first Prophets it is visible that all their parts are not equally ancient Those which we have on Joshua and Judges are simple enough and Literal That on Ruth is full of Talmudical Ideas The same judgment may be made of those on the two Books of Samuel Those which we have on the two Books of Kings are a little freer from additions But that on Esther is rather a Commentary that collects several Opinions upon difficult places than a Paraphrase In that on Job attributed to R. Joseph in the Jews Edition at Venice in Folio Anno 1515. there are divers Targums cited in express Terms as there are also in the Targum on the Psalms which bears the name of R. Joseph in the aforesaid Edition of Venice One may also observe many Additions in the Targums on the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes but especially in that upon the Canticles all which have been published under the name of R. Joseph I have said almost as much of that on the two Books of Chronicles which Beckius published about eighteen or nineteen years ago This being so one may very well ask with what justice do you ascribe these Books to those who as the Jews now say were the Authors of them when by their own confession Onkelos on the five Books of Moses is perhaps the only Translator in whom you find none of these marks of corruption which you acknowledg in the other Targums you quote For the other Targums it may be said that we ought to leave them out of the Dispute unless we would impose the new Sentiments of the Jews that lived long after Christ's time under the pretence of producing the opinions of the ancient Synagogue before Jesus Christ One may insist upon it that we are to quote the Books of Onkelos only and lay the other aside as Books of no authority since we do confess that they are full of Additions in which there are many Fables and Visions borrowed from the Talmudical Jews I might hope to satisfie any
God the Word that spoke this to the People the ancient Church could not doubt as we see in the Book of Deuteronomy where Jonathan tells us that thus Moses minded his People of what they had heard and seen at the giving of the Law Deut. iv 33. Is it possible that a People should have heard the voice of the Word of the Lord the Living God speak out of the middle of the fire as you have heard and yet live Again v. 36. Out of Heaven he hath made you hear the voice of his Word and ye have heard his words out of the midst of the fire Again he puts them in mind of the fright they were in Deut. v. 23. After ye had heard the voice of the Word out of the midst of the Darkness on the Mount burning with fire all the Chiefs of you came to me and said Behold the Word of the Lord our God has shewed us the Divine Majesty of his Glory and the Excellence of his Magnificence and we have heard the voice of his Word out of the midst of the fire why should we die as we must if we hear any more of the voice of the Word of the Lord our God for who is there living in flesh that hears the voice of the Word of the Living God speaking out of the middle of the fire as we do and yet live Again Deut. xviii 16. he minds them of the same thing in some of the same Words Many more such Quotations might be added but these are sufficient to prove that it was the undoubted Tradition of the ancient Jewish Church That their Law was given by the Word of God and that it was he that appeared to Moses for this purpose As the Word gave the Law it was he that made those many Appearances to Moses throughout his whole Conduct of the People of Israel through the Wilderness To begin with that Divine Appearance which was continually in sight of all the People of Israel for forty years together throughout their whole Travel in the Wilderness namely the Pillar which they saw in the Air day and night Where this Pillar is first spoken of namely at the coming of the People of Israel up out of Egypt there it is expresly said That the Lord went before them in the Pillar of Cloud by day and fire by night Exod. xiii 21. Afterward indeed he is called the Angel of God Exod. xiv 19. where we read that the People being come to the Red-Sea and being there in imminent danger of being overtaken by the Egyptians by whom they were closely pursued the Angel which had gone before the Camp of Israel all day removed at night and went behind them That this Angel was God it is certain not only because he is called God Exod. xiii 21. xiv 24. Numb xii 5. But also because he was Worshipped Exod. xxxiii 10. which was a sure Proof of his Divinity Being therefore God himself and yet the Messenger of God it must be that this was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word and that this was the Tradition of the ancient Church we are taught not only by Philo in the place above mentioned Quis rer Div. haeres p. 397. F.G. but also by the Jerusalem Targum on Exod. xiv 24. and Jonathan on Exod. xxxiii 9. and by Onkelos on Deut. i. 32 33. as has been mentioned When the Children of Israel after the first three days march found no other Waters but what were too bitter for them to drink at which they murmured Moses cried unto the Lord who thereupon shewed him a Tree which they threw into the Waters and thereby made them sweet Exod. xv 25. Here was a Divine Appearance and it was of the Word of the Lord according to the Jerusalem Targum A Month after their coming out of Egypt for want of Bread they murmured against Moses and Aaron at which God shewed himself so much concerned that he made his Glory appear to them in the Pillar of Cloud Exod. xvi 7 10 That according to the sense of the ancient Church this was the Shekinah of the Word has been newly shown both from Philo and from all the Targums and the same we find here in this place v. 8. where Moses tells them your murmurings are not against us but against the Word of the Lord according to Onkelos and Jonathan When Exod. xvii 8 c. the Amalekites came against this poor people that had never seen War and smote the hindmost of them God not only gave his people a Victory over them but also said unto Moses write this for a Memorial in a Book That I will utterly put out the Remembrance of Amalek from under Heaven Exod. xvii 14. See how Moses performs this v. 15. In the place where they had fought he set up an Altar inscribed Jehovah Nissi The Lord is my Standard meaning that it was the will of God they should be in perpetual War against Amalek and this reason for it he entreth in his Book v. 16. according to Jonathan for the Word of the Lord has sworn by his Glory that he will have war against Amalek for all Generations The next Divine Appearance we read of was at the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai whereof enough has been already said and we must avoid being too long For which reason we omit much more that might be said of the following Appearances in the Wilderness which are all ascribed to the Word in one or other of the Targums But I ought not to omit to take notice of some special things So for their places of Worship God promised according to the Jerusalem Targum Exod. xx 24. Wheresoever you shall mention my Holy Name my Word shall appear to you and shall bless you and the Temple is called the place which the Word of the Lord your God will chuse to place his Shekinah there according to Jonathan's and the Jerusalem Targums on Deut. xii 4. Especially at the Altar for Sacrifice which was before the Door of the Tabernacle God promised Moses both for himself and the People according to Onkelos and Jonathan on Exod. xxix 42. I will appoint my Word to speak with thee there and I will appoint my Word there for the Children of Israel Above all at the Mercy-seat where the Ark stood God promised to Moses according to those Targums on Exod. xxv 22. xxx 36. Numb xxvii 4. I will appoint my Word to speak with thee there And in sum of all the Precepts in Leviticus it is said at the end of that Book according to those Targums on Levit. xxvi 46. These are the Statutes and Judgments and Laws which the Lord made between his Word and the Children of Israel When they entred into Covenant with God obliging themselves to live according to his Laws Hereby they made the Word to be their King and themselves his Subjects So Moses tells them Deut. xxvi 17. according to the Jerusalem Targum You have
described only as the Messenger of God A Salvo as ridiculous as his Answer For most of the Characters and Works of God are ascribed to him that is there spoken of and he is expresly called the Lord of Hosts But this is not all For our Socinians not only follow the Jews but exceed them in the bold ways they take to get over those Authorities which make against them Because that the words of Psal xl 7. Thou hast bored my ears are cited by St. Paul in this manner A Body hast thou prepared me Heb. x. 5. who follows herein the LXX Text which thus paraphrases the Psalmist's words from thence Enjedinus takes occasion to accuse the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews for not having cited the Original and to traduce him as an Apocryphal Writer They go further than the Jews do on Psal xlv 6. Thy throne O God is for ever and ever A Text cited by St. Paul and applied to Jesus Christ Heb. i. 7 8. The LXX translate it as we do But the Jews have tried all ways to deliver themselves of this Authority which proves so evidently that the Messias is God As for Socinus he pretends to reject the Jews Solutions But his Disciples have invented another which is worse than that of the Jews as may be seen in Enjedinus and Ostorodius Psalm xc throughout relates to the Messias Jesus Christ applies it to himself Matth. xxii and from thence proves that he is David's Lord although he is the Son of David But Enjedinus refutes this Argument of Jesus Christ And Schlichtingius treats it as absurd This is a thing that deserves to be reflected on because these Gentlemen pretend that among them only true Christianity is continued The like way they take to answer what the Apostle saith of Christ's creating the Heavens and the Earth Heb. i. 10 11. and his Proof of it from Psal cii 27 28. And with the same Impudence do they elude the Citation from Psal cxviii 22. which is quoted Mat. xxi 42. Altho R. D. Kimchi among other Jews refers it to the Messias It is strange to see how they take the Jews part in explaining as they do Isa vii 14. A Virgin that is say they a Prophetess Crell on Matt. i. The only reason of this Explication is the word Immanuel which there follows to their great perplexity They therefore say that Immanuel is spoken of the Father in Isaiah's Prophecy and of Jesus Christ in St. Matthew's Gospel in a Mystical Sense Isaiah chap. xxxv 5. has distinctly noted the Miracles which the Messias should work and has given us a clear Character of his Person R. Solomon Jarchi endeavours to shift off this Text and to explain it of the deliverance of the People out of Babylon Socinus who could not but know how the Evangelists have referred it to the Miracles of Jesus Christ does nevertheless establish as well as he can the Explication of the Modern Jews And this he does for no other reason but because the Appearance of God himself is spoken of in the 4th Verse of this Chapter How audaciously does Crellius destroy the Proof of the Place where Christ should be born Matth. ii 5. taken out of Micah v. 2. Saith he The Jews cited it only according to the Mystical Sense But we know the Jews took it to be the Literal Sense as appears by their Targum The viiith Chapter of Proverbs was understood by Philo of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And indeed such Attributes are given to Wisdom in that Chapter as belong only to a Person such as being conceived born creating governing exercising of Mercy and the like But Socinus is not content it should go so He will have all this attributed to the Wisdom of God by a Prosopopeia just as our later Jews do interpret it of the Law Jer. xxiii 5 6. relates to the Messias in the Judgment of all the Ancient Jews Our Socinians will not allow this but rather than own that the Messias is named God they refer the Title of The Lord our Righteousness to the People there spoken of We have a remarkable Prophecy for the Proof of the Divinity of the Messias in Zech. xii 10. They shall look on him whom they have pierced The Jews anciently did and still do understand it of the Messias And Jesus Christ does apply it to himself Rev. i. 7. What saith Socinus to this He declares that this Text which is so like Psal xxii has been corrupted by the Jews and thus he trys to render its Authority useless Here you have a Sample of their conduct in rejecting the Literal and setting up a Mystical sense But there are other Quotations cited in the New Testament from which it is manifest that our Lord Jesus Christ is the God spoken of in the Old Testament the Authority of which Texts cannot so easily be eluded And to take away the evidence of these they have invented the way of accommodation David speaking of the God of Israel has these words Psal lxviii 19. Thou art ascended on high c. Hence we conclude that Jesus Christ is the God of Israel because St. Paul saith they had their accomplishment in our Lord's Ascension into Heaven Ephes iv 8. The Jews say those words in the Psalm were spoken of Moses The Socinians cannot deny they were spoken of God but deny they were spoken of the Messias literally But say they these words were applied to Jesus Christ by St. Paul only by way of accommodation Strange Is it not plain that David saith no more in this lxviii Psalm of the Messias than he saith in Psal cx which the Jews do refer to the Messias Is not the calling of the Gentiles here clearly foretold v. 33 34. which is owned on all hands to be the work of the Messias Is it not then visible that St. Paul in citing these words has followed the sense of the Ancient Synagogue who understood Psal cx of the Messias according to the Literal sense Socinus owns that the words Psal xcvii 7. which are applied to Jesus Christ Heb. i. 6. do respect the Supreme God He cannot therefore deny Jesus Christ to be the Supreme God to whom they are applied But he does it as he pleases by this way of accommodation which he saith the Sacred Author used in applying this Text to Jesus Christ And so the Adoration commanded to be given him terminates not in him but is referrable to the Supreme God who commanded this Adoration Isa ch viii 13 14. has these words Sanctifie the Lord of Hosts The Jews interpret them of the Messias Gemar Massech Sanhedr in ch iv and they are cited by St. Paul Rom. ix 32. St. Luke ii 34. St. Peter 1 Pet. ii 7. who apply them to Jesus Christ The Socinians whose Cause will not bear this that Jesus Christ should be called the Lord of Hosts do therefore deny that the Massias is here treated of or that any one else is here meant
Exposition Page 52. Chap. V. Of the Authority of the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament Page 66. Chap. VI. That the Works which go under the Name of Philo the Jew are truly his and that he writ them a long while before the time of Christ's Preaching the Gospel and that it does not appear in any of his Works that ever he had heard of Christ or of the Christian Religion Page 75. Chap. VII Of the Authority and Antiquity of the Chaldee Paraphrases Page 84. Chap. VIII That the Authors of the Apocryphal Books did acknowledge a Plurality and a Trinity in the Divine Nature Page 99. Chap. IX That the Jews had Good Grounds to acknowledge some kind of Plurality in the Divine Nature Page 115. Chap. X. That the Jews did acknowledge the Foundations of the Belief of the Trinity in the Divine Nature and that they had the Notion of it Page 138. Chap XI That this Notion of a Trinity in the Divine Nature has continued among the Jews since the time of our Lord Jesus Christ Page 158. Chap. XII That the Jews had a distinct Notion of the Word as a Person and of a Divine Person too Page 181. 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 Page 201. Chap. XIV That all the Appearances of God or of the Angel of the Lord which are spoken of in Moses have been referred to the Word of God by the ancient Jewish Church Page 214. Chap. XV. That all the Appearances of God or of the Angel of the Lord which are spoken after Moses his time in the Books of the Old Testament have been referred to the Word of God by the Jews before Christ's Incarnation Page 233. Chap. XVI That the ancient Jews did often use the Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word in speaking of the Messias Page 253. Chap. XVII That the Jews did acknowledge the Messias should be the Son of God Page 265. Chap. XVIII That the Messias was represented in the Old Testament as being Jehovah that should come and that the ancient Synagogue did believe him to be so Page 278. 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 Page 293 Chap. XX. That both the Apostles and the first Christians speaking of the Messias did exactly follow the Notions of the Old Jews as the Jews themselves did acknowledge Page 313. Chap. XXI That we find in the Jewish Authors after the time of Jesus Christ the same Notions which Jesus Christ and his Apostles Grounded their Discourses on to the Jews Page 327. Chap. XXII An Answer to some Exceptions taken from Expressions used in the Gospel Page 339. Chap. XXIII That neither Philo nor the Chaldee Paraphrases 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 Page 413. Chap. XXIV An Answer to some Objections of the Modern Jews and of the Unitarians Page 365. Chap. XXV An Answer to an Objection against the Notions of the Old Jews compared with those of the new Ones Page 380. Chap. XXVI That the Jews have laid aside the Old Explications of their Forefathers the better to defend themselves in their Disputes with the Christians Page 392. Chap. XXVII That the Unitarians in opposing the Doctrines of the Trinity and our Lord's Divinity do go much further than the Modern Jews and that they are not fit Persons to Convert the Jews Page 413. A Dissertation concerning the Angel who is called the Redeemer Gen. XLVIII Page 433. THE JUDGMENT OF THE Ancient JEWISH Church Against the VNITARIANS c. CHAP. I. The Design of this Book and what Matters it treats of IF the Doctrines of the Ever-Blessed Trinity and of the Promised Messias being very God had been altogether unknown to the Jews before Jesus Christ began to preach the Gospel it would be a great prejudice against the Christian Religion But the contrary being once satisfactorily made out will go a great way towards proving those Doctrines among Christians The Socinians are so sensible of this that they give their Cause for lost if this be admitted And therefore they have used their utmost Endeavours to weaken or at least to bring under suspicion the Arguments by which this may be proved It is now about sixty years ago since one of that Sect writ a Latin Tract about the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Chaldee Paraphrases in Answer to Wechner who had proved that St. John used this word in the first Chapter of his Gospel in the same sense that the Chaldee Paraphrases had used it before Christ's time and consequently that it is to be understood of a Person properly so called in the Blessed Trinity which way of interpreting that word because it directly overthrew the Socinian Doctrine which was then that St. John by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understood no other than Christ as Man it is no wonder that this Author used all his Wit and Learning to evade it The Construction which Socinus put upon the first Chapter of the Gospel of St. John was then followed generally by his Disciples But some years since they have set it aside here as being absurd and impertinent And they now freely own what that Socinian Author strongly opposed That the Word mentioned by St. John is the eternal and essential Vertue of God by which he made the World and operated in the Person of Christ Only they deny that Word to be a Person distinct from the Father as we do affirm And whereas Socinus taught That Christ was made God and therefore is a proper Object of religious Worship now the Unitarians who believe him to be no other than a meer human Creature following the Principles of Christianity better than Socinus condemn the Religious Worship which is paid to him As they do believe that the Jews had the same Notions of the Godhead and Person of the Messias which they have themselves so they think they have done the Christian Religion an extraordinary service in thus ridding it of this double Difficulty which hinders the Conversion of the Jews Mr. N. one of their ablest Men having read Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho in which Trypho says that he did not believe that the Messias was to be other than Man makes use of this Passage of Trypho for proof that the Doctrines of the Divinity of the Messias and by consequence of the Trinity were never acknowledged by the Jews This he does in a Book the Title whereof is The Judgment of the Fathers against Dr. Bull. His design being to prove that Justin Martyr about 140 years after Christ was
did very much contribute whence they called their Traditions the Hedge and the Rampart of the Law To conclude We ought carefully to take notice 1. That St. John Baptist did not find it needful to correct the Errors in Opinions that reigned among the People but only exhorted them to Repentance for their Sins and immoral Actions 2. That one of the chief Concerns of our Lord Jesus Christ in his Discourses with the Jews was to purge them of all that Corruption which their drowsy Casuists had introduced into their Morals with which he charges the Scribes and Pharisees in particular 3. That the Doctrine of the Sadducees which he refutes on some occasions had but a few Followers 4. That the Essens and their Party who applied themselves altogether to Piety and the Study of the Law had a great Authority with all the People that loved Religion This we may learn from Philo in some Pieces of his Works especially Lib. quod omnis Probus sit liber p. 678. 5. That the Jews though they have received very gross Ideas concerning a Temporal Kingdom of the Messias and though to support these Ideas they have confounded the Sense of divers Prophecies endeavouring to reconcile them to their carnal Notions and in bringing in new Explications of the Old Testament yet have they not been able quite to extinguish their ancienter Ideas and Principles Their new Ideas passing for no more at best than the Opinions of their celebrated Doctors which another Doctor may oppose if he will especially when he is backt with those that are ancienter and of greater Authority CHAP. III. That the Jews had certain Traditional Maxims and Rules for the Vnderstanding of the Holy Scripture WHat I have now said concerning the Traditions of the Synagogue will I believe be scarcely disputed by any Learned Man I am sure he will have less reason to oppose it that considers the Rules which as appears to us were followed by the Jews in explaining the Prophecies concerning their Promised Messias 1. It is certain that the Jews held this as a Maxim That all the Prophets did speak of the Messias and were raised up by God for this very end This we find more than once in their Talmud Beracoth c. 1. fol. 3. Sanhed c. 11. and that it was common among them in Christ's time we see in many places of the Gospel No doubt what they did in setling this Rule was not without a due and serious Examination of it first And here we cannot but deplore the rashness of some Criticks among Christians who instead of making use of the Confessions of the Old Jews upon places of the Old Testament which they referr'd constantly to the Messias whereas some of the Modern Jews endeavour to wrest them in another sense not only follow the new ones but give occasion by these means to despise Prophecies and the clearer ones as things quite insignificant What was the Absurdity of Grotius who in the 53d of Isaiah by the Servant which is spoken of absolutely understands Jeremy the Prophet whereas the Old Jews refer that Chapter directly to the Messias as you can see in the Old Midrash Chonen in the Targum in the Talmud Sanhed fol. 98. c. 2. and that is acknowledg'd by R. Alshek in h. l. to be the sense of the ancient Jews And indeed they hold as a Maxim That whensoever it is spoken absolutely of the Servant the place must be understood of the Messias Zohar in Exod. fol. 225. and by consequence they explained that Prophecy of Isaiah as concerning the Messias I can say the same upon another Maxim of the Old Jews which is of great Use That whatsoever it is spoken of the King absolutely the place must be understood of the Messias Zohar in Gen. fol. 235. If Grotius had known it he never would have related the 72d Psalm and some others to Salomon in his literal sense as he hath done but would have referred it as it must be directly to the Messias Certainly that shews us that many of the Old Jews understood the Prophets much better than to their shame such Criticks now do I wonder many times Divines who confess they cannot give any tolerable account of the Song of Songs and look upon it as a Piece composed by Salomon upon the occasion of his Marriage with the Daughter of Egypt whereas the Jews look upon it constantly as the last Piece he composed after his Repentance and we have reason enough to believe when we compare it with the 45th Psalm and the 5th of Isaiah that Salomon spoke then of the Messias the Essential Word spoken of by him Prov. 8. chiefly when we see the ancient Jews do agree to it See Philo de Colon. apud Grot. in Prov. viii 22. Bresch Rabba par 1. the first Words and Midrash in shir hash in Mercessu But let us come back to our Subject 2. I say 2dly That it is reasonable to judge that the later Prophets having considerably cleared the Prophecies of those that went before them by diffusing throughout their Writings a much greater Light they who read the later Prophets were not so careless as to neglect these Helps for the understanding of the more ancient Prophecies whose sense was otherwise not a little obscure In these Cases it was necessary to begin with the Prophets that writ last and by their Light to clear the ancient Prophecies According to this Method the Paraphrases ascribe to the Messias what we read of the Seed of the Woman Gen. iii. 15. and what Balaam prophecied Numb xxiii and xxiv And no one can doubt but that after that great Light that Isaiah gave them concerning the Messias and his Unction in his Prophecy Chap. xi they referred to him those words also of Moses Deut. xviii 18. God shall raise thee up a Prophet like unto me which is cited by St. Peter as spoken of the Messias following herein the Principles of the Synagogue Act. iii. 22. 3. It is not to be doubted but that Experience was a great help towards their understanding of Prophecies If it had not been for this the Jews would have lookt no farther than to Isaac for the fulfilling of that Prophecy Gen. xviii 18. In thy seed shall all the nations of the Earth be blessed and likewise to Salomon for that which we read 2 Sam. vii 16. and Psal lxxvi But seeing the Prophecies were not accomplished in their Persons nor did answer to their Characters and it is impossible that the Prophecies should be false the Jews were convinced as they had reason that they ought to refer these Prophecies to the Messias as also St. Paul did according to the way of his Nation 4. It is clear there were certain general Characters of the Messias which wheresoever they were found were commonly thought to denote that that place should be understood of the Messias And it is worth observing that the Light still encreasing from one Age to the other and
Christ and his Apostles spake to the Jews according to the Notions which were received among them What I say will clearly appear if we reflect on some of the Citations made by Christ and his Apostles from the Old Testament For altho Jesus Christ had in himself all the Treasures of Wisdom and altho his Apostles were divinely inspired yet they ought 〈◊〉 proportion what they said to the capacity of their hearers Their Miracles were to move and dispose them to the receiving of the Truth but their proofs and arguments were the proper means to convince their hearers of it 1. The Doctrines of the Immortality of the Soul and the Resurrection from the Dead being deny'd by the Sadducees who required an express Text of Moses for the proof of those Doctrines and affirmed that there was not any such to be found in the Writings of Moses our Saviour proves it against them by these words which stopped their mouths and raised the admiration of the multitude I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob but God is not the God of the dead but of the living Mat. xxii 32. His proof was by a known and necessary consequence from that Text out of the Law which he inferred according to the received method among the Jews For the Jews at this day do gather the same Doctrines from the same words Vid. Mede his Works p. 801. Exod. iii. 6 15 16. which Jesus Christ alledged to prove them by The astonishment of the people on this occasion did not proceed from the newness of his argument as if they had never heard the like before for they gathered also the Doctrine of the Resurrection from Moses his Song as we see in Josephus de Macchab. p. 1012. But it arose from another cause to wit his giving them such a Spiritual notion of the Resurrection as was not clogged with the difficulties drawn from that instance of a Woman's Marriage to more Husbands than one which the Sadducees justly urged against that gross Idea of a Resurrection that many of them had wherein Marriage and other actions of mortal life should have place 2. Our Blessed Saviour in the same 22th ch of St. Matth. asked the Pharisees whose Son the Messias was to be they answered the Son of David i. e. the Scripture saith he should descend from the Line of David Against which Christ raises this Objection How then does David in spirit or inspired by the Spirit call him Lord And he alledges for proof that David calls him Lord the words of Psal cx 1. The Lord said to my Lord sit thou at my right hand till I make thy enemies thy footstool If then David by the Spirit called him Lord how is he then his Son It appears that Jesus Christ in making this Objection did take these three things as granted by the Jews at that time 1. That Psal cx was the work of the Prophet David 2. That this Psalm concerned the Messias 3. That the name Adonai is in this place equivalent to the name Jehovah There is not any of these things which the Jews will not dispute at this day But that their Forefathers did hold that these words were spoken to the Messias it appears by their Midrash on the Psalms and Saadia Gaon on Dan. vii 13. Indeed their Targum justifies all that our Saviour said in this place not only in acknowledging that this Psalm was composed by David but also that it was written for the Messias who is therefore instead of Adonai called Memra or the Word according to Fagius his reading which is most natural to the place But that Memra the Word denotes the Messias shall be shown in the sequel of this Discourse St. Paul has taken the same way Act. xiii 24. where he quotes these words from Isa lv 3. I will give you the sure mercies of David He refers this passage to the sending of the Messias altho the Text seems obscure enough for such a reference But he does it in pursuance of the explication given of it by the ancient Jews who understood this Chapter of the Messias So does R. David Kimchi upon this verse and Aben Ezra and Sam. Laniado and R. Meir Ararma and Abarvanel Upon the same ground he applies to the Messias in the same Chapter the words of Psal xvi 10. Thou wilt not leave thy holy One to see corruption He proves that they could not be understood of David seeing that his Sepulchre the Monument of his Corruption remained till that day He ought first to have proved that this Psalm was spoken of the Messias and then have proved that it could not belong to David But this method was needless since he went on this known Maxim among the Jews That whatever Psalm was not fulfilled in David ought to be understood of the Messias Let us proceed to another clear proof of this Proposition St. Paul in Heb. i. 6. quotes a Text from Moses Song Deut. xxxii 43. according to the LXXth Version 'T is commonly believed that the Quotation is out of Psal xcvii 8. but the very words Let all the Angels of God worship him are not found in that Psalm They are in the Greek of Moses Song without the least alteration though it must be confessed they are not there in the Hebrew Text. I will not dispute whether the Jews have lost out of their Bibles this part of the ancient Text since St. Paul's time They may in their Vindication shew that neither the Samaritans have in their Text this Quotation which is extant in the LXX It seems therefore that this Song of Moses was copied separately from the rest of the Pentateuch for their convenience who were to learn it by heart to which some pious People added a few Verses out of the Psalms that concerned the same Subject Which Copy with the Additions was translated by the LXX because the People had generally committed this to their Memory What I conclude from hence is this That St. Paul made no difficulty to quote words that were only in the LXX Version because they contained things conformable to the ancient Sentiments of the Jews and following the Genius and Doctrine prevailing in his Nation he referrs these words to the second Appearance of the Messias when all the Angels of God shall pay him adoration If we read St. Paul's Citation Gal. iii. 8 16 of the Promise God made to Abraham that in his seed all the nations of the Earth should be blessed which he understands of the Promise of the Messias we shall quickly judge that he followed herein the sense of the ancient Synagogue I know the greatest part of the Modern Jews do understand it of Isaac As if God had said All the Nations of the Earth shall wish their Friends the Blessing which God gave to Isaac But the Ancients understood it otherwise as we can judge by the Book of Ecclesiasticus ch xliv 25. They referred it to the Calling of
the Son of the Free-woman and Israel according to the Flesh by Ishmael the Son of the Bond-woman and having thus brought unbelieving Israel into Ishmael's place he proceeds upon the Old Jewish Nation recited in Baal-Hatturim that Ishmael should pierce Isaac with an Arrow which they illustrate by Gen. xvi 12. instead whereof the Text saith only that he laughed at or mocked Isaac We see St. Paul Rom. x. 6. applies to the Gospel those words of Deut. xxx 11 12 13 14. which seem to be spoken of the Law given by Moses to the Jews But then the Old Synagogue applied these words of Moses to the times of the Messias as is clear from Jonathan's Targum on the place which is enough to justify St. Paul's Usage of the words We read in the Song of Zacharias Luk. 1.69 that these words are referred to the Messias he hath exalted the horn of his Anointed The very same words are pronounced by Hannah the Mother of Samuel 1 Sam. ii 10. where the Targum referrs them in like manner as the sense of the Synagogue The same Targum understands of the Messias that passage 2 Sam. xxiii 3. And the lxx have the like Idea with the Targum which is a farther Confirmation of the Tradition of the Synagogue It is certain this Notion of the Messias was very common among the Jews otherwise they would not have thrust it into their Targums on places where naturally it ought not to come in For instance It is said 1 Kings iv 33. That Solomon discoursed of all the Trees from the Cedar of Libanus even to the Hyssop that springeth out of the Wall Now the Remark of the Targum hereupon is this And he prophecied touching the Kings of the House of David which should rule in this present World as also in the World to come of the Messias 6. We see our Lord Jesus Christ was careful to instruct the Pharisees of the two different Characters of the Coming of the Messias Luk. xvii 20. Of which the one was to be obscure and followed with the Death of the Messias the other was to be glorious and acknowledged by the whole World Christ instructed them in this the rather to remove their mistakes through which they confounded his two Comings Though in truth they were both of them confessed by the Jews for some time after Christ's ascension into Heaven 7. We see that Christ himself Matth. xxi 16. and also his Apostle St. Paul 1 Cor. xv 27. Eph. i. 21. Heb. ii 6 7 8. apply the words of Psal viii to the Messias How could they do it were it not before the sense of the Synagogue Now that such was the sense of the Synagogue ye see till this day if we read what they say in their Rabboth upon the Song of Songs ch iv 1. and upon Ecclesiastes ch ix 1. that the Children were to make Acclamations at the Coming in of the Messias the second Redeemer according to those words of Psal viii 3. Ex ore infantium c. Lastly We see St. Paul Rom. x. 18. does refer the words of Psal xix 4. to the Preaching of the Apostles and saith Their sound went over all the Earth and their words to the end of the World What would an unbelieving Jew have said to this that Paul should apply the Psalmist's words in this manner But the Apostle was secure against this or any other Objection from the Jews if he used the words in the sense of their Synagogue And that he did so there is little reason to doubt The Encomiums which David gave to the Law of Moses they would most readily apply to the Law of the Messias And they expected he should have his Apostles to carry his Law throughout the World To this expectation of theirs the Psalmist's words were very applicable That the Divine Word is called the Sun Philo plainly affirms and if I take R. Tanchum aright he understands that it was the Messias that was called the Sun of Righteousness Mal. iv 2. St. John saw Christ in that figure of the Sun and his Apostles as twelve Stars and that in Heaven which to him is the state of the Gospel Rev. xxi 1. According to this figure in this Psalm the Sun of Righteousness is described as a Giant which rejoyceth to run a Race v. 5. And here is a description of his Course together with that of his Disciples and of the manner by which they made their Voices to be heard This Idea shocked R. Samuel in a Book he writ before his Conversion ch 18. which he communicated with a Rabin of Morocco And whoever considers that Idea of the Writer of the Book of Wisdom xviii 5. shall find it is no other than that of this xixth Psalm mixed a little with that Idea in the Canticles which the Old Jews refer to the Messias and with that of the Song of Isaiah v. touching the Messias which served the Jews for a Commentary to understand the Song of Solomon by I could gather a much greater number of Remarks on this Head but having brought as many here together as I take to be sufficient for the proving of what I have said I think I ought not to enlarge any further So I come next to search out the Store-house where we may find these Traditions of the Jews which Jesus Christ and his Apostles made use of either in explaining or confirming the Doctrines of the Gospel They must be found in the ancient Books of the Jews which remain among us such as the Apocryphal Books the Books of Philo the Jew and the Chaldee Paraphrases on the Old Testament The Authority of all these ought to be well established Let us begin by the Apocryphal Books some of which Mr. N. hath ridiculed very boldly Then we shall consider what he has said to Philo whose Writings Mr. N. hath endeavoured to render useless in this Controversy How justly we shall consider in the next Chapters CHAP. V. Of the Authority of the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament ALthough the Protestants have absolutely rejected the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament which the Church of Rome make use of in Controversies as if they were of the same authority with the Books of the Law and Prophets notwithstanding they keep them as Books of a great antiquity And we make use of their authority not to prove any Doctrine which is in dispute as if they contained a Divine Revelation and a decision of an inspired Writer but to witness what was the Faith of the Jewish Church in the time when the Authors of those Apocryphal Books did flourish Any body who sees the Socinians making use of the Authorities of Artemas or of Paulus Samosatenus to prove that the Christian Church was in their opinion must grant the same authority to the Books of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the like touching the Sentiment of the Jewish Church in the age of those Writers Grotius a great Author for the Socinians was
lectitant Nazaraei Salvator inducitur lâ—quens Modo me arripuit Mater mea Spiritus Sanctus This Passage of the Nazarene's Gospel would never have been understood if we had not known that the Jews call the Holy Spirit Imma Mother as well as Binah Understanding as we see in Zohar and other Cabalists And perhaps from hence Philo de Temul calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of the World Nor are we to fancy that the Talmudists oppose the Cabalists herein No Maimonides who is a Talmudist agrees in this with the Cabalists as appears from his Book de fundament legis ch 2. Mor. Neb. p. 1. ch 68. Lastly Nor is it to be urged against what I have said that the Jews have formal Disputes against the Doctrine of the Trinity as Saadiah Sepher Emunoth ch 2. Maim Mor. Neb. p. 1. c. 71. For we may remember 1. That all their Disputes with the Christians are built on this wrong bottom That the Christians are Tritheists and deny the Unity of the Deity 2. That almost all those who dispute against the Christians on this Head contradict themselves in their Writings that are not Polemical but are drawn up in cool Blood out of the heat of dispute of which Saadiah Haggaen as I have shewed before is a Proof 3. The Study of their Rites having been the great business of the Jews for many Centuries it hath happen'd that their greatest Authors have applied themselves but little to the Study of the Traditions concerning their Doctrines In Maimonides one of the greatest Men the Jews ever had we have a plain Example of it He tells us That it was towards the declension of his Life before he could turn himself to study their Traditions and he laments his Misfortune in that he could not begin this Study sooner This is related by R. Elias Chaiim who saith he had it from a Letter of Maimonides to one of his Scholars I have said before that these Notions of the Cabalist Jews are received in all parts of the World where the Jews are found in any numbers And I say it not without good reason For 1. The Rabboth are Books received whereever there are Jews Now this Book begins with the Notion of a Second Person 2. For the Cabalists they are dispersed with the other Jews and in all places where Learning is cultivated and Study encouraged there they are to be found 3. We may well infer the Universality of this Tradition from the several different Authors that have written alike on this Subject without any Consent or Communication together that we know of R. Saadiah Hagaon writ in Babylon in the Tenth Century He was an Egyptian by Birth and the Translator of the Pentateuch into Arabick and wrote a bitter Book against the Christians which hath been printed at Thessalonica and since at Amsterdam where he disputes against the Christians Trinity yet he teaches not only the Unity but this distinction from everlasting in the Deity R. Moses Bar Nachman in the Thirteenth Century and R. Judas the Levite writ in Spain and yet we see how they agree in their Notions with the Cabalists which flourished other-where R. Aaron writ at Babylon and yet his Notions are as exactly like those of Spain as if he had trod in their Steps R. Moses Botril writ in France and he teaches the same things He that would see the Places at large may consult their Comment on the Book Jetzira It is now time to return to the Judgment of the Ancient Synagogue and to consider how it agrees or differs with us in the other Matters we have in hand CHAP. XII That the Jews had a distinct Notion of the Word as of a Person and of a Divine Person too A Great part of the Dispute we have with the Socinians depending on the true meaning of the first Chapter of St. John's Gospel where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is spoken of as being he that created the World and was at length made Flesh and whom we Christians look upon as the promised Messias I think I can't do the Truth a greater service than in clearing this Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shewing what thoughts the ancient Jews had concerning it Socinus confesses that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Person for he owns that St. John did describe the Man Christ Jesus by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and attributed to him the Creation of the Church which is according to him the new World But here in England the followers of Socinus will not stand by this Exposition but understand by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that virtue by which God created Heaven and Earth as Moses relates Gen. i. They obstinately deny this Virtue to be a Person i. e. an Intelligent Subsistence and rather look upon it as a Divine Attribute which they say was particularly discovered in the Mission of Jesus Christ for the Salvation of Mankind It cannot be denied us that St. John being one of the Circumcision did write with an especial respect to the Jews that they might understand him and receive benefit by it and therefore it cannot be doubted but that when he called Jesus Christ the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he used a word that was commonly known among the Jews of those times in which he lived Otherwise if he had used this word in a sense not commonly known to the Jews he would have signified to them the new Idea he had affixed to it But he gives not the least intimation of any thing new in it though he uses the word so many times in the very beginning of his Gospel It is certain therefore that he used it in the sense wherein it was then commonly understood by the Jews Now the Idea the Jews had of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the same they had of a real and proper Person that is a living Intelligent free Principle of Action That this was their Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word we shall prove by the Works of Philo and the Chaldee Paraphrases To begin with Philo He conceives the Word to be a true and proper cause For he declares in about a hundred places that God created the World by his Word He conceived the Word to be an Intelligent Cause Because in him according to Philo are the Original Ideas of all things that are expressed in the Works of the Creation De Opif. p. 3. G. 4. C.D. He makes the Word a Cooperator with God in the Creation of Man and says that God spake those words to him Let Us make Man Gen. i. 26. It may be added that he calls the Word the Image of God and makes Man the Image of this Image * Lib. Quis rer Divin Haer. p. 400. E. F. These are some of the Characters that represent the Word as a true Person But there are others no less demonstrative of this Truth As 1. where Philo asserts that the 〈◊〉
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 Targums but these are abundantly enough to shew the sense of the ancient Church what they thought of him that so often appeared to their Fathers in the Wilderness and spoke to them by his Servant Moses When Moses understood that God was not willing he should live to bring his People into the Promised Land thereupon he besought God to send him a Successor in these words according to Jonathan's Targum Numb xxvii 16. Let the Word of the Lord who has dominion over the souls of men appoint a faithful man over the Congregation of his People God having appointed Joshua in his stead Moses gave him this Charge in the hearing of the People Deut. iii. 21 22. according to Onkelos and Jonathan Thy eyes have seen what the Lord hath done to Og and Sihon so shall he do to all the kingdoms where thou art to pass therefore fear them not for the Word of the Lord your God shall fight for you The same he repeated afterward to all the People telling them first Deut. xxxi 2 3. according to Jonathan The Word of the Lord hath said to me Thou shalt not pass over this Jordan but the Lord your God and his Shekinah will go before you Josh iv He addeth And Joshua will go over before you as the Lord has spoken And for all your Enemies ver 5. The Word of the Lord shall deliver them up before you therefore saith he ver 6. according to Onkelos Fear them not for the Word of the Lord your God goes before you he will not fail nor forsake you After this he calleth to Joshua and saith to him before them all ver 7. according to Jonathan Be strong and of a good Courage for thou must go with this People into the Land which the Word of the Lord has sworn to their Fathers that he would give them and the Shekinah of the Word of the Lord shall go before thee and his Word shall be thy help he will not leave thee nor forsake thee fear not therefore neither be dismay'd He repeats it again from God to Joshua ver 23. according to Onkelos and Jonathan Thou shalt bring the Children of Israel into the Land which I have sworn to them and my Word shall be thy help It was the same day that together with this Charge Moses gave to Joshua his Prophetical Song Deut. xxxi 22 23. And the self-same day xxxii 48. God bade him Get thee up into Mount Nebo and dye After which Moses staid no longer than to give the Tribes of Israel his Blessing before his Death xxxiii 1. That being done he went up to Mount Nebo xxxiv 1. There according to Jonathan It was the Word of the Lord that gave that Satisfaction to his Bodily Eyes to see all the Land of Canaan before they were closed So ver 5. Moses the Servant of the Lord died there according to the Word of the Lord. He was translated by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sacr. Abr. p. 162. C. D. according to Philo. It was certainly the current Tradition of the Church in his Age that his Soul was taken out of his Body by a Kiss of the Word of the Lord as Jonathan renders it or according to the Jerusalem Targum at the Mouth of the Decree of the Word of the Lord. After his Death Joshua entred into the Government ver 9. and according to the Jerusalem Targum the Children of Israel obeyed Joshua and they did as the Word of the Lord had commanded Moses Besides all these Divine Appearances to Moses and the Children of Israel there are also some few that were made to Balaam on their account and are therefore recorded in the same Sacred History Where these are first mentioned Numb xxii 9. both Onkelos and Jonathan have That the Word came from before the Lord to Balaam and said what followeth in that place So again the second time ver 20. according to the same Targums The Word came from before the Lord to Balaam by night and said to him what followeth in that second place It is plain that so far the Ancient Jewish Church took these Appearances to have been made by the Word But what Opinion had they of the Angel's appearing to Balaam ver 22. Others may ask what they thought of the Dialogue between Balaam and the Ass that he rode upon occasioned by the Fright that the Beast was in at the Angel's appearing to him All this as Maimonides * More Nebochim 11. p. 42. saith happened only in Vision of Prophecy But that it was a thing that really happened we are assured by St. Peter who tells us 2 Pet. ii 16. God opened the mouth of the dumb beast to rebuke the madness of the Prophet As it cannot be doubted that Balaam was used to have Communication with Devils that spake to him in divers manners so there is reason to believe they spoke to him sometimes by the mouth of dumb Beasts and if so then to hear the Ass speak could not be strange to him And why God should order it so there is a reason in Jonathan and the Jerusalem Targum The Reader may see other Reasons elsewhere †Muis Varia p. 95. but they are not proper for this place But we are here to consider whether this that appeared to Balaam was a created Angel or no. It appears by the words ver 35. to have been the Lord himself that appeared as an Angel to Balaam for thus he saith to him Go with the men but only the word that I shall speak to thee that thou shalt speak Now it doth not appear after this that any other spoke to him from God but God himself Therefore Philo saith plainly that this Appearance was of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as has been already shown And that this was the Sense of the Church in his Age we may see in the two following Appearances to Balaam where as well as in the two that were before this the Targums say It was the Word that met Balaam and spoke to him Thus both Onkelos and Jonathan on Num. xxiii 4 and 16. CHAP. XV. That all the Appearances of God or of the Angel of the Lord which are spoken after Moses his time in the Books of the Old Testament have been referred to the Word of God by the Jews before Christ's Incarnation THUS far it has been our business to shew that it was the Word that made all those Appearances either of God or of an Angel of God that was worshipt in any part of the five Books of Moses We have been much larger in this than was necessary for our present occasion But whatsoever may seem to have been too much in this Chapter it is hoped the Reader will not wish it had been spared when he comes to reflect upon the use of it to prove that the Word was a Person and that he was God At present there will be some kind of amends for the prolixity hitherto in the
worship'd in it and since the Jews understand this place of the Messias it must follow that the Messias is Jehovah It is evident that the Lord and the Messenger or the Angel of the Covenant are the same Person whose coming is promised to the Jews as a thing very near But it is no less evident that this Angel of the Covenant is the same which is spoken by Jacob Genes xlviii 15 16. as the Redeemer and is named by Isaiah ch lxiii the Angel of the face Now all the Ancient Jews agree that that Angel or Messenger is the Shekinah or Jehovah himself as we see in R. Menachem de Rekanati fol. 54. col 2. fol. 66. col 2. fol. 72. col 4. fol. 73. col And they agree all that the Shekinah and Jehovah is the same It is a Point agreed by the Talmudist and by the Cabalist as it is explained by R. Menach fol. 73. col 3. fol. 77. col 4. fol. 79. col 3. This being so who can deny that the Text of Malachi is an undeniable proof that the Messias was to be Jehovah himself according to the Ideas of the most Ancient Jews If we had not such Confessions of the Jews 't will be easy to supply the want of them by the help of the general Tradition that reigns among them and proves clearly that the Messias was to be Jehovah himself They hold that the Messias shall be greater than all the Patriarchs and even the Angels themselves Neve shalom l. 9. c. 5. How can this be unless he be truly Jehovah And whence could they take this Notion except from Psalm xcvii 7. where the Angels are commanded to worship him It is very easy to reconcile that Idea with the Notions of the old Jews touching the Messias supposing him to be the Shekinah and Jehovah and that this Shekinah or Jehovah was to be the same Person with the Messiah as they confess R. Menach fol. 73. col 3. and fol. 77. col 4. and fol. 79. col 3. They teach constantly that Angels receive their virtue from the Shekinah R. Menach fol. 8. col 1. and fol. 12. col 1. They teach that the Shekinah is the God of Jacob R. Men. fol. 38. col 3. that he appeared to him at Bethel and promised him to govern him without the Ministry of Angels R. Menach fol. 41 42. They said the Shekinah is the Jehovah who appeared to the Patriarchs R. Menach fol. 56. col 1. They maintain that the Temple was built to worship the Shekinah R. Menach fol. 63. col 1. fol. 70. col 2. fol. 73. col 4. fol. 74. col 2. They maintain on the other side that 't is not lawful to pay any religious worship to Angels although sent by God as Messengers of him or as Mediators R. Menach fol. 68. col 2. They deny that the Ancient Patriarchs have paid other worship than a civil one to an Angel when he appeared to them R. Menach Ibidem col 3. But it is impossible to reconcile those Ideas with the Opinion of the Messias being only a meer Man Indeed he that will reflect on all these Prophecies will very hardly think that then when the High-Priest demanded of Jesus whether he was the Son of God and Jesus answered that he was so the Jews did understand only that he made himself a great Prophet Both the Jews and Socinians own that in this Answer he made himself the Messias which according to both of them is more than a great Prophet and the High-Priest was so sensible of it that he called it Blasphemy In short the Angels who are God's Ministers could not serve nor obey one that was only as well as themselves a Creature He must be God to have the Angels Subjects to him He must be God to govern the World and to discern the thoughts of the heart without which he could not be a competent Judge And they that imagine a Creature could be made capable to know hearts and to exercise those other Acts which are the Characters of the Divinity do form to themselves the greatest Chimera in the World It is therefore necessary that the Ancient Jews having these Notions of the Messias should have conceived an intimate and close habitation of the Word in his Person by which all these Prophecies should receive their accomplishment and all the Promises of God concerning the Messias should be perfectly fulfilled The Unitarians conceive they have done a great service to the Christian Religion when to court the Jews favour they deny the Divinity of the Messias and condemn as Idolatry the Worship which Christians pay to Jesus Christ In this they argue more consistently than Socinus himself as I have said in my Preface to this Book But after all I can say that besides they cannot answer Socinus his Argument for the Worship of Jesus Christ they shall not get from the Jews what they pretend by their opinion Indeed the Jews would be in the right to condemn us as Idolaters if we did worship Jesus Christ as a meer Creature But they cannot do that justly if they reflect seriously upon the Grounds which we lay for the Adoration of the Messias As it is a thing which I hope shall be of some use to undeceive the Unitarians I am willing to add to the foregoing observations upon the Trinity and Divinity of the World the sense of the Synagogue to this Article And indeed it would be unconceivable that the Jews should have believed the Messias to be true God and should not be ready to worship him It is a thing which Christians and Jews are agreed upon that there is but one God who is to be Worshipped The Jews and the ancient Christians did agree that Angels must not be Worshipped From which it follows that if the Jews acknowledged that the Messias is to be Worshipped they must have acknowledged him to be God and vice versa Now there are positive Orders of God to Worship the Messias as Psal ii 12. Kiss the Son Who is that Son spoken in this place it is the Messias as it is granted by the ancient Synagogue as we see in Ecclesiasticus I called upon the Lord the Father of my Lord. And Tehillim Rabba with many others use this place of Psal ii to the Messias So the Breshit Rabba in Gen. xlix so the Talmud in Succa c. 5. Saadias in Dan. vii 13. with the ancient witness R. Salom Jarchi in his Comment I know well that the Greek Interpreters have Translated those words of the second Psalm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that Version is rejected by the Jews who read now in their Spanish Translation Printed at Ferrara Besad hiio pro que non se insanne which is the sense of Lombroso in his short Notes upon that place So it is understood by R. Abensueb in h. l. We read in Psal viii 3. From the mouth of babes c. It was so well known
him or which may not from the circumstances of the Text be well explained otherwise This is his Position in examination of Gen. xlix 10. where he doth his utmost to evade the Text v. 10. The Scepter shall not depart from Judah c. 3. He looks on the Article of the Messias's Coming to be a matter of that small importance to the Jews that he leaves it doubtful whether the Messias be come since the time of Onkelos their famous Paraphrast who expresses his expectation of this Promise in many places of the Books of Moses and if he be not already come whether he shall come in the Glory of the Clouds of Heaven or whether he shall come poor and riding on an Ass and because of Men's sins not distributing those great Blessings promised at his Coming nor Men on the other hand regarding him as the Messias Certainly R. Lipman in his Nitzachon where he examines the above mentioned Text Gen. xlix 10. advances a Rule which quite overthrows all Proofs from the Holy Scripture This Rabin seeing the Jews give such opposite Interpretations of Jacob's Prophecy concerning the Scepter 's continuance in Judah as were impossible to be reconciled some understanding Empire by the Scepter and some Slavery and oppression he lays this down for a Maxim That the Law was capable of divers Explications and all of them though never so incompatible and contradictory were nevertheless the words of the Living God This is very near the Sentiment of R. Menasseh Ben Israel in his Questions on Genesis where he collects the several Jewish Expositions of this Text. But granting this once for a Principle it is in vain to consult the Scriptures or to think of ever discovering the meaning of them The sense of them must absolutely depend on the Authority of the Rabins and what they teach must be all equally received as the Word of God though they teach things contradictory to one another Such Positions put one to a loss whether their blindness or their spite is therein most to be pitied CHAP. XXVII That the Unitarians in opposing the Doctrines of the Trinity and our Lord's Divinity do go much further than the Modern Jews and that they are not fit persons to convert the Jews WHAT I have observed of the alteration made by the Modern Jews in their Belief is enough to shew that they were forced to adopt new Notions because of the evident Proofs drawn from the Opinions of their Ancestors which the Christians used against them The very same prevarication may be charged on the Socinians in their Explications of those places of Scripture that prove the Blessed Trinity and the Divinity of our Saviour And 1st They have borrowed many of the Jews answers to the Christians and often carried them much further than the Jews themselves did intend them 2dly They have invented the way of accommodation for the evading of those Quotations in the New Testament that are taken out of the Old Testament as finding this the most effectual means to escape those difficulties which they can no other way resolve 3dly The Unitarians especially those of England to make short work do not stick to assert that the Christians have foisted those Texts into the Gospel which speak of the Trinity and the Divinity of our Lord. It is fit I should give particular Instances of each of these in proof of what I say Smalcius * De Divin Chr. c. 10. maintains in the general That the Books of the Old Testament are of little use for the Conversion of the Jews He gives this reason for it That almost all that which is said to be spoken of the Messias in the Old Testament must be interpreted mystically before it can appear to be spoken of him and by consequence very remotely from what the words do naturally signify Then in particular When we would prove a Plurality of Persons in the Deity against the Jews from those Expressions of Scripture that speak of God in the Plural Number although the Jews as you may see in their Comments on Gen. i. 26. xi 7. and especially on Isa vi 8. are forced to own that a Plurality is imported in those Expressions and therefore pretend that the Number is Plural because God speaks of himself and the Angels his Counsellors yet the Socinians as Enjedinus witnesses for them do deny that these Plural Expressions do denote any Plurality in the Deity no more than Expressions in the Singular Number do As for Socinus he solves it by a Figure by which as he saith a single Person speaks plurally when he excites himself to do any thing A Figure of which we have no Example in the Writings of the Old Testament Socinus has followed the Jews Evasion on the words Gen. iii. 22. Behold the Man is as one of Us in maintaining that God does herein speak of himself and of the Angels And Smalcius has followed him in this Solution The very same Eplication they give of the words Gen. xi 7. Let us go down and confound their Language borrowing entirely the Subterfuge of the Jews who at this day teach that God spoke it to the Angels Crellius on Gal. iii. 8. espouses the Jewish Sense of the Text Gen. xii 3. In thee shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed by which he overthrows the force of St. Paul's Citation and makes it nothing to the purpose He supposes that St. Paul did herein allude only to the Passage in Genesis but on the contrary it appears that he followed the Literal Sense as we have it Gen. xii 3. xviii 18. xxii 18. xxvi 4. xxviii 14. and as the Ancient Cabalists do acknowledge at large in Reuchlin L. 1. Smalcius ch 2. Ib. asserts That the Promise of the Seed of the Woman Gen. iii. 5. can very hardly be understood of the Messias And yet the Ancient Jews acknowledged it in their Targum of Jerusalem and by the Cabalists Tikunzoh 21. fol. 52. col 2. Bachaie fol. 13. col 3. in Gen. Schlichtingius affirms that Psal xlv does literally relate to Solomon and that this is its first and principal sense Altho the Ancient Jews do all agree that it treats of the Messias and cannot be understood of Solomon Socinus persuading himself that St. Paul cites Heb. i. 6. from Psal xcvii 8. And let all the Angels of God worship him does maintain that he cites it in the mystical Sense because Jesus Christ could not be adored by the Angels before he was advanced to be their Head And yet the Jews of old did refer it to the Messias adding these words in the end of Moses's Song Deut. xxxii as we see there in the LXX Version from whence it was indeed that St. Paul took the words in Heb. i. 6. Again Socinus to rid himself of Psal xxiv where according to the Ancient Jews Opinion the Messias is spoken of does pretend that the Messias is not meant here in this Psalm or at least he is