follows, ‘ viam viri in adolescentia; and it may thus seem to be differenced from the same word in all other places. But, thirdly, Indeed the meaning of the wise man is evident: it is a virgin that he intended by the word, and maby 722 ΤΊ], is the way that a man taketh to corrupt a virgin. This is secret, hidden, full of snares and evils, such as ought not to enter into the thoughts of a good man to conceive, much less to approve of. And, therefore, whereas he says of the residue of the quaternion joined with this, ver. 18, qwbp2, ‘they are too wonderful for me,’ he adds, on the mention of this evil, ‘nyt’ x2, ‘1 know it not.’ Or, as Hierome, ‘ penitus ignoro,’ which he could not say of the way of natural generation. And by this means, she who is called 172>Y ὦ virgin, ver. 19, is made NN MWR, a harlot, ver. 20, and has become impudent in sinning. A man having, by subtle wicked ways, prevailed against her chastity, and corrupted her virginity, she afterwards becomes a common prostitute. And this I take to be the genuine meaning of the place, though it be not altogether improbable, that the wise man in ver. 20, proceedeth to another especial instance of things secret and hidden in an adulterous woman, 19 signifying as much as so also, which it doth in sundry other places.
§ 27. And these are all the places, besides that of the prophet under consideration, where the word is usedin the Old Testament. So that both its derivation, and also its constant use, will admit of no other signification, but only that of an unspotted virgin. Besides, the LX-X. render it in this place παρθενος, a virgin, and the Targum nny, by which word the other Targums express a virgin, Gen. xxiv. 24, 59; Esth. 1.2, iv. 4: Ruth ii. 23; 1 Sam. xxv. 42. Neither is any other word in the Scripture so constantly and invariably used to express an incorrupted virgin as this is. mys hath respect only to age, and signifies any one that is young, whether she be married, or unmarried, a virgin, or one deflowered. 1272 also is used for one corrupted, Deut. xxii. 23, 24. As also for a widow, Joel 1. 8. So that by the word ma>y a virgin is precisely signified, or the Hebrews have no word denoting exactly that state and condition. And lastly, the prefixing of 7 in this place ΤΙ, makes the denotation of the word more signal. It is so prefixed only in other two places, Gen. xxiv. and Exod. 1]. In both which places the Jews themselves will not deny but that unspotted virgins are intended.
§ 28. Further, There are other considerations offering themselves from the context, undeniably proving that itis the conception of a virgin which is here intended and foretold. or first, it is plainly some marvellous thing, above, and contrary to the ordinary course of nature that is here spoken of. It is called MN a signal prodigy, and is given by God himself in room of, and as something greater, and more marvellous than any thing that Ahaz could have asked either in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, had he made his choice according to the tender made unto him. ‘The Lord God himself shall give you a sign.’ The emphasis used in giving the promise, denotes the marvellousness of the thing promised. Now, certainly it was no such great matter that the wife of Ahaz, who had before borne him a son, who was now eight years of age, or that the wife of the prophet, who was the mother of Shearjashub, then present with his father, or that any virgin then present immediately to be married, should bear a son. Surely, this could not have been called a prodigy, or an eminent sign of God's accomplishing what he undertook to perform, when within the same space of time hundreds of sons were born to other woman in the same country. And it is ridiculous for the Jews to pretend that the sign was great in this, that the prophet should foretel that conception, as also that it should be a son that should be born, and not a daughter; for the work and sign intimated doth not consist at all in the truth of the prophet’s prediction, but in the greatness of the thing itself that was foretold. |
§ 29. The Jews cannot tell either who was the virgin or who was the son that is here intended. Some of them affirm that Alma was the wife of Ahaz, and that the son promised was Hezekiah; but this is rejected by Kimchi himself, he acknowledging that Hezekiah was now eight years old, being born four years before his father came to the kingdom, in the fourth year of whose reign this promise was given unto him. Others would have the Alma to be the wife of the prophet, and the son promised to be Maher-shalal-hashbaz, whose birth is mentioned in the next chapter. But neither has this any more colour of reason. For his wife is called ΤΙΝ the ‘ prophetess,’ and could on no account be termed maby, a ‘virgin,’ as she had a son some years old at that time with his father. And that son of hers in the eighth chapter, is promised as a sign quite to another purpose, and could on no account be called >x12y, ‘Immanuel,’ as this promised. child is, to whom the land is said to belong, ch. viii. 8. And as to what they, lastly, add concerning some virgin then standing by, who was shortly after to be married, it is as fond as any other of their imaginations. For besides that the prophet says not iT mabyr, ‘this virgin,’ as he would have done, if his speech had respected any one then present; it is a mere arbitrary invention, no way countenanced by the text or context; and if men may be allowed thus to interpret Scripture, it is easy for them to pervert it at their pleasure. On all which considerations it appeareth, that no one can possibly be intended in this promise, but he whose birth was M8 a miraculous sign,’ as being born of ma>y ‘a virgin, and who being thus born was ὉΝ ΣΡ ‘God with us,’ both in respect of his person uniting the natures of God and man in one, and in respect of his office reconciling God and man, that God might dwell with us in a way of fayour and grace. This is he to whom the land belongs in an everlasting kingdom.
§ 30. I have insisted the longer on this particular point, because in this is comprised all that the prophecy is cited for by the evangelist, and all that we are especially concerned to establish from it. And this being undeniably proved and confirmed, that it is the Messiah whose birth is here foretold, as also that he was to be born of a virgin, other things im the passage, whatever difficulty we may meet with in them, must be interpreted agreeably thereunto. And we have shown before, that because of the typical condition of that people, many of the promises of the Messiah were so mixed with things belonging to their temporal interests, that it is often a matter of some difficulty to distinguish between them. But it is enough for us, that we prove unquestionably, that those passages which are applied to him in the New Testament were spoken in the Old, with this intention that they should be applied to him. This we have proved with respect to the passage which foretels that he should be born of avirgin; and in those parts of the prophecy which belonged to the then state’of the Jews, we are not particularly concerned. However, we shall manifest in answer to the remaining exceptions of the Jews, that there is nothing mentioned in the whole prophecy that hath any inconsistency with what we have declared, as to the sense of the principal point of it; nay, that the whole of it is excellently suited to the principal scope, as already shown and vindicated.
§ 31. That, then, which in the second place is objected by the Jews against our application of this prophecy to Jesus Christ, is that the birth of the child here promised, was to be a sign to Ahaz, and to the house of David, of their deliverance from the two kings who then waged war against them. And this they say, the birth of the Messiah so many hundred years after, could give them no pledge or assurance of. And Ist. We do not say, that this was given them asa peculiar sign, or token of their present deliverance. Ahaz himself had before refused such a sign. But God only shows the reason in general why he would not utterly cast them off, although they wearied him, but would yet deliver them as at other times. And this was because of that great work which he had to accomplish among them, which was to be signal, marvellous, and miraculous. And this he calls ΤῊΝ, a sign in its absolute, not in its relative sense; as denoting a wonderful work, such as sometimes he wrought to evidence his great power. In this sense NINN, ‘signs, are joined unto ὉΠ, ‘ prodigies, Deut. xxvi. 22; Jer. xxxiil. 20; Neh. iv. 10, where the works so called, were great and marvellous, but not formally signs of any thing, unless it were of the wonderful power of God by which they were wrought. So the miracles of our Saviour and the apostles in the New Testament are called σημεῖα, signs for the same, and for no other cause. And the word is thus absolutely used very often in the Old Testament.
Besides, that which is secondly alleged, that a thing that shall come to pass many ages after, cannot be made a sign of that which was to be done many ages before, is not universally true. The thing itself in its existence, it is true, cannot be so made a sign; but it may in the promise and prediction of it. And we have many instances of things promised for signs, which were not to exist in themselves, until after the accomplishment of the things whereof they were signs, as Exod. iii. 12; 1 Sam. xi. 34; Isa. xxxvil. 10; 1 Kings xxii. 25. God intending by them the confirmation of their faith, who should live in the time of their actual accomplishment.
Thirdly. This sign had the truth and force of a promise, although it was not immediately to be put in executton, and that is the reason that the words here used, are one of them i177, ‘conceive, in the preterperfect tense, the other 175%, in ‘benoni,’ or participle of the present tense, to intimate the certainty of the events, as is usual in the prophetical dialect. Their assurance, then, from this sign, consisted herein, that God informs them, that as surely as he would accomplish the great promise of bringing forth the Messiah, and would in this put forth his marvellous power, that Messiah might be conceived and born of a virgin, so certainly should they be delivered from their present dangers.
§ 32. It is further insisted on by them, that the deliverance promised was to be wrought before the child spoken of should know to refuse the evil and choose the good; or should come to years of discretion, ver. 16, and how could this be said of him that was to be born some hundred years after? Answ. Ist. That the ἽΝ, ver. 16, is the same with the j2 promised, ver. 14, doth not appear. The prophet, by the command of God, when he went unto the king with his message, took with him Shear-ja-shub his son, ver. 3. This certainly was for some special end, with reference to the message that he had todeliver. Now, the child being then but an infant, could be of no use in the matter, unless to be made an instance of something that was to be done. It is, therefore, probable that he was the 1y27, the young child mentioned, yer. 16, before whose growing up to discretion, those kings of Damascus and Samaria were to be destroyed. Or 2dly. The expression may denote the time of any child’s being born and coming to the maturity of understanding, and so, consequently, it may respect the promised child.
In as short a space of time as this promised child, when he shall be born, shall come to know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, shall this deliverance be wrought.
§ 33. Their remaining cavils are of little importance. The child intended chap viii., was to be the son of the prophet and prophetess, and so not this child that was to be born of a virgin. Besides, he is plainly promised as a sign of other things than those treated of in this chapter, yea, of things quite contrary to them. Again, this child they tell us was to be called Immanuel, whereas the Son of Mary was called yw, or, as they maliciously write it, W*. But this name of Immanuel is given to signify what he should be and do, and not what he should be commonly called. He was to be God and man in one person, and he was to reconcile God and man; he was thus to be every way Immanuel. And this kind of expression, when a thing is said to be called that which it is, the name denoting the being, nature, and quality of it, is so frequent in the Scriptures that there is nothing peculiar in it as here used. See Isa. i. 26, νη]. 3, ix. 6; Jer. xxlil. 6; Zech. viii. 2. The like also made be said to their last objection, namely, that they know-not that Jesus of Nazareth was brought up with butter and honey, which is foretold concerning this child. For the expression signifies no more but that the child should be nourished with the common food of the country, or with such food as children in those places and times were nourished with; it being the special blessing of that land that it flowed with milk and honey. Thus, we have asserted and vindicated the third characteristical note of the true Messiah: he was to be born of a virgin, which no one but only our Lord Jesus ever was from the foundation of the world.
§ 34. There remain yet other descriptive notes of the Messiah, consisting in what he was to teach, and to do, and to suffer, all of them guiding the faith of the church unto our Lord Jesus, who in all things fully answered to them all. I shall consider them briefly, according to our design, beginning with what he was to teach. To this Moses directs us, when he gives that great ‘predescription of him, which we have Deut. xviii. 18, 19, ‘ I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unte them all that I shail command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.’ This is that signal testimony concerning the Messiah, which Philip urged out of Moses to Nathaniel, John i. 45, which Peter not only applies to him, but concerning it he declares that Messiah was solely intended in it, Acts 11. 22, 23, and Stephen seals that application with his blood, Acts vii. 37. Neither can or do the Jews deny that the Messiah was to be a prophet, or that he was promised unto the church in the wilderness in these words. But we shall consider the particulars of them.
§ 35. Sundry things are here asserted by Moses concerning the Messiah; as Ist. In general, that he should be a prophet; a teacher of the church, and not a king only. The Jews indeed, who greedily desire the things which outwardly attend kingly power and dominion in this world, do principally fix their thoughts and expectations on his kingdom. The revelation of the will of God which was made by him, they little desire or inquire after. But the common faith of their ancestors from this and other places, was, that the Messiah should be a prophet, and7should reveal to the church the whole counsel of God, as we shall evince in our commentary on the first words of the epistle. 2dly. That this prophet should be raised up to them from among their brethren, that is, should be of the posterity of Abraham, and of the tribe of Judah, as was promised of old; or be made of them according unto the flesh, Rom. i. 3, ix. 5. So that as to his original or extraction, he was to be born in the level of the people; from among his brethren was he to he raised up, unto this office of a prophet and teacher of the church. 3dly. That he must be like unto Moses. [{ is plainly taught in many places, that in the ordinary course of God’s dealings with that church, there was none among the prophets like unto Moses, neither before nor after him. Hence, Maimonides with his followers, conclude that nothing can ever be altered in their law, because no prophet was ever to arise of equal authority with him who was their lawgiver. But the words of the text are plain. The prophet here foretold was to be like unto him, and in this he was peculiar and exempted from comparison with all other prophets, who were to build on the foundation laid by Moses, without adding anything to the rule of faith and worship which he had revealed, or changing any thing therein. But the prophet here promised is to be like unto Moses; that is, he is to be a lawgiver to the house of God, as our apostle proves and declares, chap. iii, 1—5. And we have the consent of the most sober among the Jews to the same purpose.
The words of the author of Sepher Ikkarim, lib. 3, cap. 10, are remarkable. mwa zon “mM Ἰ ΣῪ) ἽΝ Ddoyd ammo. mp Ndw IWwer ox WMD Dp NW ἼΝΝ WMD OPN WD Fax yw bya ἽΝ ys TT ims S2nw cad my ἽΝ IP mm ΝῚΠΞ wT Dp xdw κὸν ddiyd Sax wma Dp xd. ὉΠ ANID ApPDpW Jy Ink OND Nw ἸῸῚ yn ΣῪΤΣ ἽΝ TD NBD ID ΝΞ, ‘It cannot be that there should not at some time, arise a prophet like unto Moses, or greater than he; for Messiah the king should be like him, or greater than he; but thus, these words, there arose none like him, ought to be interpreted, not as though none should ever be like him, as to some particular quality or accident; or that in all the space of time wherein the prophets followed him, until prophecy ceased, none should be like unto Moses; but hereafter there shall be one like him, or rather greater than he. This is what we affirmed before, that in the whole series of prophets that succeeded in that church building on Moses’ foundation, there was none like unto him, but the prophet here promised was to be like to him, and in other regards, as appears from, other testimonies far greater than he. ‘This was of old their common faith, from this prediction of Moses. And wherein this likeness was to consist, our apostle declares at large in the third chapter of this Epistle. Moses was the great lawgiver, by whom God revealed his mind and will, as to his whole worship, while the church state instituted by him was to continue. Such a prophet was the Messiah to be, a lawgiver, so as to abolish the old, and to institute new rites of worship, as we shall afterwards more fully prove. 4th. This raising up of a prophet like unto Moses, declares that the whole will of God, as to his worship and the church’s obedience, was not yet revealed. Had this been the case, there would have been no need of a prophet like unto Moses, to lay new foundations as he had done. Those whose who succeeded, building on what he had founded, and therefore, said not to be like unto him, would have sufficed. But there were new counsels of the will of God, as yet hid, to be finally and fully revealed by this prophet. And after his work is done, there is no intimation of any further revelation to ensue. 5th. The presence of God with this prophet in his work, is promised. ‘He would put his word into his mouth,’ or speak in him, as our apostle expresseth the same matter, ch. i. 1. And lastly, his ministry is further described from the event, with respect unto them who would not submit unto his authority, nor receive the law of God at his mouth. God would require it at their hands; that is, as those words are interpreted by Peter, they should be cut off from among his people, or from being his people. And the accomplishment of this signal threatening, gives light to the whole prediction. Some of the Jews, from these words have fancied to themselves another great prophet, whom they expect as they did of old, before the coming of the Messiah. So in their dealing with John the Baptist, they asked him whether he were Elias, which he denied, because, though he was promised under that name, yet he was not that individual person whom they looked for, that is, the soul of Ehas the Tishbite, as Kimchi tells us, with a body new created like unto the former. Then, they further demand whether he were ὁ προφητης, ‘ the prophet promised by Moses,’ which he also denies, because that prophet was no other than the Messiah, John i. 21. To the same purpose also, the Spirit of the Lord is promised ‘to rest upon the Messiah, to make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord, that he might not judge after the sight of his eyes,’ &c., Isa. xi. 3—5; see also chap. Ixi. 1, 2. And from this great prophet were the isles of the Gentiles to receive the law, chap. xi. 1, 2. The sum of all is, the Messiah was to be a prophet, a prophet like unto Moses, that is, a lawgiver; one that should finally and perfectly reveal the whole will’and counsel of God, with such authority, that whosoever refused to obey him should be exterminated, and cast out from the privilege of being reckoned among the people of God.
§ 36. We are then, in the next place, to consider the accomplishment of this promise in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Now, the, history of his life, and the event, do abundantly testify that he was a prophet, and that he was so esteemed by the Jews themselves, until through the envy of the Scribes and Pharisees, and through their own unwillingness to receive his pure and holy doctrines, they were stirred up to oppose and persecute him, as they had done all other prophets, who in their several generations fore— told his coming, see John i. 46, vi. 17; Acts i. 22,23. Their present obstinate denial hereof, is a mere contrivance to justify themselves in their rejection and murder of him. But this is not all;-he was not only a prophet in general, but he was that prophet who was foretold by Moses, and by all the prophets who built on his foundation, who was to put the last hand to divine revelations, in a full declaration of the whole counsel of God. Now, this is the peculiar work of the Messiah, and in the ensuing consideration of the doctrines of Jesus Christ, with the success and event of them, we shall evince that he accomplished this work.
§ 37. First. The nature of the doctrine taught by this prophet gives testimony to our assertion. Whatever characters of that truth which is holy and heavenly, can be rationally conceived or apprehended, they are all eminently and incomparably imprinted on the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Whatever tends to the glory of God, as the first cause, and the last end of all things, as the only Sovereign Ruler, Judge, and Disposer of all, as the only infinitely holy, wise, righteous, good, gracious, merciful, powerful, faithful, independent Being, is clearly and evidently, and in a heavenly manner revealed therein. Whatever is useful or suitable to excite and improve any good that is in man, in the notions of his mind, or in the inclinations of his will, to discover his wants and defects, that he may not exalt himself in his own imagination above his real condition; whatever is needful to reveal to man his end, or his way, his happiness, or the means conducing thereunto, this, the doctrine of Jesus plainly teaches. Whatever may bring man into a due subjection to God, and subordination to his glory; whatever may teach him to be useful in all those relations in which he may be placed, to the full extent of the moral principles of his nature, as a creature made for society; whatever it useful to deter him from evil, and to suppress in him every evil thing, even in the hidden seeds of it, which lie beneath the first instances that reason can discover, and that in absolute universality, without the least indulgence on any pretence; whatever can produce these effects, the doctrine of Jesus forcibly inculcates. Whatever can be conceived as fitted to excite man, to provoke him unto, and to direct him in the practice of all that is true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report; of all that is virtuous or praiseworthy; that may begin, bound, guide, limit, finish, and perfect the whole system of moral actions in him, in relation to God, to himself, and to others; all this is revealed, confirmed, and ratified in the doctrine of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It hath stood upon its trial above sixteen hundred years in the world, challenging the wit and malice of its adversaries, to discover any one thing, or any circumstance of any thing, that is untrue, false, evil, uncomely, not useful, or inconvenient in it It also challenged men to find out anything that is morally good, virtuous, useful, praise-worthy, in habit or in exercise, in any instances of operations, in any degree of intention of mind, any duty that man owes to God, to others, or to himself, that is not taught, enjoined, encouraged, and commanded by it; or to discover any motives, encouragements, or reasons unto, and for the pursuit of that which is good, and for the avoiding of evil, that are true, real, solid, and rational, which it inculcates not on them that embrace it. This absolute perfection of the doctrine of this prophet, joined with those characters of divine authority which are enstamped upon it, sufficiently evidences that it contains the great, promised, full, final revelation of the will of God, which was to be given by the Messiah. Add hereunto, that since the revelation of this doctrine, the whole race of mankind hath not been able to find out any thing, that without the most palpable folly and madness might be added to it, much less stand in competition with it. Let these things be considered, and they will sufficiently demonstrate the author of this system.
§ 38. Secondly. We have declared in the entrance of this discourse, that the Messiah was the means promised for delivering mankind from that woeful estate of sin and misery into which they had cast themselves. This was declared unto all in general, and this was believed by them whom God graciously enabled thereunto. But how this deliverance should be wrought in particular by the Messiah, how the works of the devil should be destroyed, how God and man should be reconciled, how sinners might recover a title to their lost happiness, and be brought to an enjoyment of it; this was unknown not only unto all the sons of men, but also to all the angels in heaven themselves. Who, then, shall unfold this mystery which was hid in the counsel of God, from the foundation of the world? It was utterly beyond the reason and wisdom of man, to give any tolerable conjecture how these things should be effected. But all this is fully declared by this prophet himself. In his doctrine, this great and hidden mystery of the reconciliation and salvation of mankind, opens itself gloriously to the minds and understandings of them that believe, for their eyes the God of this world doth not now blind. For, although this promise of the Messiah was all that God revealed to Adam, and by him unto his posterity, to keep their hopes alive in their miserable condition; yet such was its obscurity, that the minds of men being full of darkness, and their hearts being set upon the pursuit of their lusts, it was as to the substance of it, utterly lost to the greatest part of mankind. Afterwards by new revelations and pro- mises, it was again made known to some, but the manner of its accomplishment was still left hid in the depths of the bosom of the Almighty. But by the preaching of Jesus, both the thing itself, and the manner of it, are together brought to light, being made known and established beyond all the power of Satan to prevail against it. This was the work of the promised prophet; this was done by Jesus of Nazareth, who is, therefore, both Lord and Christ.
§ 39. Thirdly. We have also declared, how God in his wisdom and sovereignty restrained the promise to Abraham and his posterity, and how he shadowed out among them the accomplishment of it in Mosaic rites and institutions. These also received manifold explications by the succeeding prophets. And from the whole, a system of worship and doctrine arose, which turned wholly on this hinge of the promised Messiah, relating in all things to the salvation to be wrought by him. But yet the will and mind of God in this whole dispensation was wrapt up in types, was vailed and shadowed by carnal ordinances, and was obscured and hid in allegorical expressions; so that the bringing these truths forth to light, the removal of the clouds and shades that were spread over them, and the declaration of the nature, reason, and use of all those institutions, was a work no less glorious than the very first revelation of the promise itself. This was that which was reserved for the great prophet, the Messiah; for it is unreasonable to imagine that God would prescribe ordinances and institutions to his church, whose full nature, use, and end, should be for ever unknown unto them. Now this manifestation of the nature and design of these ordinances is given in the doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ. From it we learn the spiritual end, use, and nature of all these sacrifices, and typical institutions, which to them who were conversant only with their outside, were servile performances, and an insupportable yoke of bondage. ‘This they were to the Jews in the days of the apostles, and this they are to their children, for they are never able to satisfy themselves in their most scrupulous attendance to them. But these were all made evident and plain, and all that was taught by them was accomplished by the prophet like unto Moses. He fulfilled the end, and unvailed the mind of God in all these institutions. And he hath done it so fully, that whosoever looks upon them through his declaration of them, cannot but be amazed at the blindness and stupidity of the Jews, who rejecting the revelation of the counsel of God by him, adhere pertinaciously unto that whereof they understand not one tittle or syllable aright, For the meanest Christian who is instructed in the doctrine of the gospel, can give a better account of the nature, use, and end of Mosaic institutions, than all the profound Rabbins in the world either can, or ever could do; he that is least in the kingdom of God, being greater in this light and knowledge, than John Baptist himself, who yet was not behind any of the prophets that went before him. This, I say, is that which the promised prophet was to do; and moreover, he was to add institutions by his own immediate revelation, even as Moses had given them the law of ordinances of old. And in this institution of new ordinances of worship, thereby Se τοῖα those instituted by Moses, was he like unto him, as was foretold.
§ 40. Lastly, The event confirms the application of this character to the Lord Jesus. Whoever would not receive the word of this prophet, God threatens to require it of him, that is, as themselves confess, to exterminate them from among the number of his people, or to reject them from being so. Now this was exemplified in the case of the Jewish nation. They received him not, they obeyed not his voice, and what was the end of this their disobedience? They who for their despising, persecuting, and killing the former prophets, were only corrected, chastened, afflicted, and again quickly recovered out of the worst and greatest of their troubles; upon their rejection of him, and disobedience to his voice, are cut off, destroyed, and exterminated from the place of their solemn worship, and utterly rejected. from being the people of God. Whatever may be conceived to be contained in the commination against those who disobey the voice of the promised prophet, all of it in its whole extent, came upon the Jews, for their disobedience of the doctrine of Jesus of Nazareth. Now this, added to the foregoing considerations, undeniably proves him to have been that prophet.
§ 41. There is yet another character given of the Messiah in the Old Testament; it is derived from what he was to suffer in the world, in the discharge of his work and office. This being the main foundation of the whole deliverance, and that which God knew would be most contrary to the apprehension and expectation of that carnal people, is of all other notes of him, most clearly and fully revealed. Without an understanding of the nature and effects of the sufferings of the Messiah, and how these were to be satisfactory to the justice of God, little or nothing of the promise, or of Mosaic institutions, can be rightly understood. But because we must treat of these matters in our explication of the epistle itself, we shall not here insist on them. It is sufficient to our present intention, that we prove that the Messiah was to suffer, and that as he was to endure many other miseries, so he was to suffer death itself; and that this his suffering is foretold as a character to know and discern him by. Now that Jesus of Nazareth, by so many other demonstrations, and evident tokens proved to be the Messiah, did also suffer the utmost that could be inflicted on a man, and in particular that he did submit to the things and evils which the Messiah was to undergo, we shall not need to prove; the Jews confess it, and even glory that their forefathers were the instrumental cause of his sufferings. Neither doth it at present concern us to declare what he suffered from God himself, what from man, and what from Satan, in his life and death, in his soul and body, and in all his concerns; it being abundantly sufficient to our present purpose, that he suffered all manner of miseries; and, lastly, death itself, and that not for himself, but for the sins of others.
§ 42. The first evident testimony given hereunto, is in Ps. xxii. from the beginning to ver. 22. That sufferings, and those very great and inexpressible, are treated of in this Psalm, the Jews themselves confess; indeed the matter is too evident to be denied. That dereliction by God, tortures and pains in body and soul, revilings, mockings, with cruel death, are sufferings, is certain, and they are all here foretold. Again, it is evident, that some individual person is designed as the subject of those sufferings. Most of the Jews would interpret this Psalm of the body of the people, to whom not one line in it can be properly applied. For besides, that the person intended, is spoken of individually throughout the whole prophecy, he is also plainly distinguished from all the people, of what sort soever; from the evil amongst them who reviled and persecuted him, ver. 7, 8, and from the residue, whom he calls his brethren, and the congregation of Israel, ver. 22. It cannot, then, be the congregation of Israel that is spoken of; for how can the congregation of Israel be said to declare the praises of God, before the congregation of Israel, which is the sum of Kimchi’s exposition. Some of them from the title of the Psalm, >mwn nds dy; ‘for the hind of the morning, would have it to be a prophecy of Esther, who appeared as beautiful as the morning in the deliverance of Israel. But as the title is of another import, respecting the nature of the Psalm, not the person treated of in it, so they are not able to apply one verse or word in it to her. Others. of them plead, that it is David himself who is intended; and this is not without some shadow of truth; for David might in some things propose his own afflictions and sufferings, as types of the sufferings of the Messiah. But there are many things in this Psalm that cannot be applied unto him absolutely. When did any open their lips, and shake their heads at him, using the words mentioned, ver. 7,8? When was he, or his blood poured forth like water, and all his bones disjointed? ver. 14. When were his hands and feet pierced? ver. 16. When did any part his garments, and cast lots on his vesture? ver. 18. When was he brought to the dust of death, before his last and final dissolution? ver. 15. And yet all these things were _ be accomplished in the person of him, who is principally treated of in this salm.
§ 43. This whole Psalm, then, is a prophecy of the Messiah, and ab-. solutely of no other, as may further be evidenced from sundry passages in the Psalm itself. For first, It treats of one in whom the welfare of the whole church was concerned; they are, therefore, all of them invited to praise the Lord on his account, and for the event and success of his sufferings which they had the benefit of, ver. 22, 23. Secondly. It is he by whom the meek shall be satisfied, and obtain life eternal, ver. 26. Thirdly. Upon his sufferings, as the event and consequence of them, the Gentiles are to be gathered in unto God, ver. 27. ‘All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.’ And this by the confession of the Jews is the proper work of the Messiah, to be effected in his days and by him alone. Fourthly. The preaching of the truth and righteousness and faithfulness of God in his promise to all nations, that is the preaching of the gospel, ensues on the sufferings described, ver. 31, which they also acknowledge to belong to his days. So that it is the Messiah, and he alone, who is absolutely and ultimately intended in this Psalm.
§ 44. Now the whole of what is here prophesied was so exactly fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, in all the instances of it, that it appears to be spoken directly of him, and no other. The manner of his sufferings is scarcely more clearly expressed in the story of it by the evangelists, than it is here foretold by David in prophecy, and therefore many passages out of this Psalm are expressed by them in their records. He it was who, pressed with a sense of God’s dereliction, cried out, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? He it was that was accounted a worm and no man, and reviled and reproached accordingly; at him did men shake their heads, and reproach him with his trust in God; his bones were drawn out of joint by the manner of his sufferings; his hands and feet were pierced, and upon his vesture lots were cast; upon his sufferings were the truth and promises of God declared and preached to all the world: 50 that it is his suffering alone which is beforehand described in this Psalm.
§ 45. But the Jews object to our application of this Psalm to the Lord Jesus, from our own principles (as they imagine) and greatly triumph in their supposed advantage; but, indeed, their triumph is only in their own blindness and ignorance. Jesus, they tell us, in the ‘ opinion of Christians, was God, and how can these things be spoken of God; how con'd God ery vu 2 out, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? how could men pierce the hands and feet of God? And sundry of the like queries are made by Kimchi on the several passages of this Psalm. But we know of how slender importance these things are. He who suffered was God; but he suffered not as God, nor in that wherein he was God; for he was man also, and as man, and in that wherein he was man, did he suffer. But their ignorance of the union of the divine and human nature in the person of Christ, each nature preserving its distinct properties and operations, is what they would by no means part with, because it stands them, as they suppose, in great stead, as furnishing them with those weak and pitiful objections that they use to make against the gospel.
§ 46. We have yet another signal testimony to the same purpose, Isa. liii. _ As the outward manner of the sufferings of the Messiah, with the actings of them who were instrumental therein, is principally considered in Psalm xxil., so the inward nature, end, and effect of them, are declared in this prophecy. There are also various passages in it relating to the covenant between the Lord Christ and his Father, for the carrying on of the work of redemption by this way of suffering. The ancient Jews not understanding Messiah’s personal subsistence before his incarnation, referred these unto his soul, which they imagine was created at the beginning of the world. Indeed, there is not any prophecy that fills the present Rabbins with more perplexities, or drives them to more absurdities and contradictions. It is not our present business to explicate the particular passages of the prophecy, or to make application of them to the Messiah. It hath been done already by sundry learned men, and we also have cast our mite into this sanctuary on another occasion. That on which we insist, is obvious to all; namely, that dreadful sufferings in soul and body, and that from the will and good pleasure of God, for ends expressed in it, are here foretold and declared. At present, our only inquiry is after the Person spoken of; for whoever he be, the Jews will not deny but that he was to suffer all sorts of calamities. That it is the Messiah, and none other, we have evidence from the text and context, from the nature of the subject-matter treated of, and from the utter impossibility of applying the thing spoken of unto any other person, without | overthrowing the whole faith of the ancient church. Moreover, from the confession of the Jews themselves, we have all the advantage which can be expected, or need to be desired from adversaries. For,
§ 47. First. The most ancient and best records of their judgment, expressly affirm that the person spoken of is the Messiah. I refer to the Targum on the place, which they esteem of unquestionable, if not of divine authority. The spring and rise of the whole prophecy, as the series of the discourse manifests, is in ver. 13. of ch. lii., and there the words, Sow TT ‘T2y, ‘Behold my servant shall prosper, or deal wisely, are rendered by Jonathan, Nw ‘Tay my. NT, ‘Behold my servant the Messiah shall prosper. And among other verses, the 5th verse of ch. lin. is so paraphrased by him, as that none of the Jews will pretend any other to be intended: M2583) ΟΠ» ΞΕ ADANN wana SomNT ΝΟΥ ΤΡῚΣ ma aT ΝΣ Ppamy saan wyaenad sana ΝΟ “20> ΝΘ. ‘And he shall build the house of our sanctuary, which is profaned for our sins, and delivered for our iniquities, and in his doctrine shall peace be multiplied unto us: and when we obey his word, our sin shall be forgiven us. Here, indeed, he greatly perverts the text, yet he gives us that sense which, by their own confession, is applicable only to the Messiah. And by this, as by other parts of his interpretation, he stopped the way to the present rabbinical evasions. The translation of the LXX. they have formerly avouched as their own. And this also plainly refers the words to the Messiah and his sufferings, though somewhat more obscurely than it is done in the original.
In the Talmud itself, lib. Saned. Tractat. Chelek., among other names they assign unto the Messiah, 8°21 is one; because it is said in this place, NW) NT IPdrT JON, ‘ truly he bore our infirmity.’ We have their ancient Rabbins making the same acknowledgment. To this purpose they speak in Bereshith Rabba on Gen. xxiv. 17, ‘ This is Messiah the King, who shall be in the generation of the wicked, and shall reject them, and choose the blessed God and his holy name, to serve him with his whole heart.’ ΤΙΝ jny oqya maynmd) od Seq. ἼΝΞ parm wpad 12d. «And he shall set his heart to seek mercy for Israel, to fast, and to humble himself for them,’ ἼΘΙ ΣΦ NIT “Ὁ, as it is said, Isa. liti., ‘He was wounded for our transgressions” NDT) WAND) ΠΣ ovary predy whan si DN Sw 122. ‘And when Israel sinneth, he seeketh mercy for them, as it is said again, And by his stripes are we healed.’ So Tanchuma on ver. 13, ch. li. mw 7d mM, ‘this is King Messiah.’ And not to repeat more particular testimonies, we have their full confession in Alshech on the place, with which I shall close the consent. ΓΤ) 71 by api vasp ms ΤῸ ὉΤῚ man, ‘ Behold our masters, of blessed memory, with one consent determine according as they received by tradition, that it is concerning Messiah the King that these words are spoken.’ And, therefore, Abarbinel himself, who of all his companions hath taken most pains to corrupt and pervert this prophecy, confesseth that all their ancient wise men were of the same opinion with Ben Uzziel in his Targum. So that we have as full a suffrage unto this character of the Messiah from the Jews themselves, as can be desired or expected.
§ 48. This testimony is also corroborated by the weakness of the opposition which at present they make to our application of this place unto the Messiah. It is rather to rage than to reason that they trust. Indeed they act as if they had adopted the maxim ‘ Pereant et amici, dummodo et inimici pereant.’ Let Targum, Talmud, Cabal tradition, and former masters, be all esteemed liars, or deceived, if Christians may thus be disappointed. New expositions and applications of this prophecy they coin, wherein they openly contradicted one another; yea, the samie man (as Abarbinel) sometimes contradicts himself. And when they have done, they suggest such things as are utterly inconsistent with the faith of the ancient church concerning the Messiah, and indulge in innumerable follies, no way deserving our serious consideration. The chief things which they most confide in, we shall speedily remove out of our way.
First. Some of them say, that this prophecy indeed concerneth the Messiah, but not Messiah Ben David who shall bealways victorious, but Messiah Ben Joseph, who shall be slain in battle against Gog and Magog. But 1. This figment wholly overthrows the faith of the true Messiah, and they may as well make twenty as two of them. 2. That Ben Joseph, who is the mere creature of their own imaginations, is to be a great warrior from his first appearance, and after many victories, is to be slain in a battle, or at least so it is to be thought. But this prophecy speaks of a man who is poor, destitute, despised, and afflicted all his life; who is bound, imprisoned, rejected, scorned, condemned, and slain under a pretence of judgment; not one thing of all this do they ascribe, or can they ascribe to their Ben Joseph.
2. Others feign that the true Messiah was born long ago, and that he lived among the leprous people at the gates of Rome, being himself leprous and full of sores, which, as they say, is foretold in this prophecy. Such monstrous imaginations as these could not be repeated without some participation in the folly of their authors, were it not that poor souls are ruined by them, and that they evidence what a foolish thing man is when left to himself, or judicially given up to blindness and unbelief. We are ready to wonder at the senseless stupidity of their forefathers, who chose to worship Baal and Moloch, rather than the true God, who had so eminently revealed himself unto them, and the Jews of the present day themselves wonder at this; but it doth in no way exceed the stupidity of those who have lived since the rejection of the true Messiah, and we do not need any other instance than that before us to make good our observation. For this story of the leper is not only most absurd in itself, but moreover it does not in any thing answer the words of the prophecy, nor indeed hath it any countenance from one word therein; that single word on which they found their notion signifying any kind of infirmity or sorrow in general.
3. Some of them apply this prophecy to Jeremiah, concerning whom Abarbinel affirms, and that truly, that no one line or verse in the whole can with any colourable pretence be applied unto him; which also I have in particular manifested on another occasion. He applies it two ways: 1. To Josiah. 2. To the whole body of the people; contradicting himself in the exposition of every particular instance, and the truth in the whole. But itis to the whole people, in their last desolation, that they chiefly desire to wrest this prophecy. But this is, 1. Contrary to the testimony of their Targum and Talmud, to all their ancient masters, and to some of the wisest of their more modern doctors. 2. It is contrary to their own principles, profession, and belief; for they acknowledge that their present misery is continued on them for their sins, and that if they could but repent and live to God, their Messiah would undoubtedly come; but this place speaks of the perfect innocence and righteousness of him that suffers, he no way on his own account deserving so to suffer; now, if they ascribe this innocence to themselves, and yet their Messiah is not come, they must for ever bid adieu to all their expectations of him. 3. It is contrary to the express words of the text, plainly describing one individual person. 4. It is contrary to the context, distinguishing the people of the Jews from him that was to sufter by them, among them, and for them, ver. 3—6. 5. 1015 contrary to every particular assertion and passage in the whole prophecy, no one of them being applicable to the body of the people. All these things are so manifest to every one who shall but read the place with attention, and without prejudice, that they need not any farther confirmation. Hence Johannes Isaac confesses, that the consideration of this place was the means of his conversion.
§ 49. Again, the whole work promised from the foundation of the world to be accomplished by the Messiah, is here ascribed to the person treated of, and to his sufferings. Peace with God is to be made by. his chastisement, ver. 5, and healing of our wounds by sin, is from his stripes. He bears the iniquity of the church, ver. 6, that they may find acceptance with God. In his hand, the pleasure of the Lord for the redemption of his people was to prosper, ver. 10. And he is to justify them for whom he died, ver. 11. Ifthese and the like things here mentioned may be performed by any other, the Messiah need not come, there is no work for him to do in this world. But if these are the things which God hath promised that he shall perform, then he, and none other, is here intended.
§ 50. Neither are the cavils of the Jews about the application of some expressions unto the Lord Jesus, worth the least consideration. For all of them may be easily removed, the whole prophecy being exactly accomplished. in him, and his passion being here set forth beyond any instance of a description of any thing future in the whole Scripture. Besides, our faith does not depend on the application of these disputed expressions. Let them but grant that the true and only Messiah was to converse among the people in a despised, contemned, reproached condition; that he was to be rejected by them, to be persecuted, to suffer, to bear our iniquities, and that from the hand of God; that he was to make his soul an offering for sim, and by that means spiritually to redeem and save his people; then, as they know well, there is an end of this controversy, for then the Lord Jesus must on all hands be acknowledged to be the true and only Messiah.
§ 51. But that we may not seem to avoid any of the pretences, or exceptions that they make use of, when they are pressed with this testimony, I shall briefly consider what their later masters object to our interpretation of this passage. These men think themselves wiser than the authors of their Targum and Talmud, and all their ancient doctors, who with one consent acknowledge the Messiah to be intended in this prophecy, and wrest it to the people of the Jews themselves, to whom not one line or word of it is applicable. First, then, They say, that it is not the prophet speaking by command from the Lord, nor in the persons of the people of the Jews, but ᾿ that it is the kings of the earth who formerly had aftlicted them, who are mentioned, ch. lii. 15, who utter and speak the words of this chapter, in an admiration of the blessed state to which the Jews shall at length attain.— Answ. Any man that shall but view the context, will easily the shameful folly of this evasion. For 1. Where is there any instance in the whole Scripture of such introduction of aliens and foreigners, and of the prophets personating them in what they say, and why should such a singular imagination here take place? 2. How could they say, ‘Who hath believed our report,’ or the doctrine that we had heard and taught concerning this person, or these persons? Had the kings and nations preached the misery and subsequent happiness of the people of the Jews, that they are forced to complain of the incredulity of men, that they would not believe them? And who would not believe them? The Jews? ‘They believe it well enough? The nations and their kings? They are supposed to be the men complaining that they are not believed; so that the fondness of this imagination is beyond expression. 3. How do they say, ‘For the iniquity of my people he was stricken,? ver. 8. Who are they for whom this was endured, when the people themselves are supposed to speak? In brief, let all the Jews in the world find out one expression in the whole prophecy tolerably suited unto this hypothesis of theirs, and I shall be contented that the whole of it be granted unto them, and be used according to their desires.
§ 52. Secondly. They add, that the subject of this prophecy is spoken of in the plural number, and so cannot intend any one person. This they endeavour to prove from those words of the Lord, ver. 8, 97> yr vay pw which they render, ‘atransgressione populi mei plaga illa.’ ‘ Lamo,’ is of the plural number, and so cannot, say they, respect any single person, but must denote the whole people. Answ. But what perverseness is this ἢ Whoever is intended in this prophecy, he is spoken of twenty times as a single person; and such things are spoken of him, as can by no artifices be suited to any collective body of people.. And shall ong expression in the plural number outweigh all these in the singular number, and be used to pervert the whole context, and to render it unintelligible? 2. But suppose the word to denote many, and not one single person, will it not unavoidably follow, that in the passage mention is occasionally made of some other persons, besides him who is the principal subject of the prophecy; and so the sense can be no other, but that the people of the prophet, that is the Jews, should assuredly be punished for the rejection of him, whose person and work he prophesieth about. 3. The truth is, the word hath not necessarily a plural signification: 1729, ‘lamo,’ is most frequently put for 1, by the insertion of 1, whereof we have sundry instances in the Scriptures, Gen, ix. 26, ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; 15 J2y jy39 7, and Canaan shall be his servant: ‘lamo’ for ‘lo.’ Job xx. 23, ‘God shall cast the fury of his wrath upon him, 1172 yay mum, and it shall rain upon him whilst he is eating: ἽΝ for ~>y. So again the same word is used, ch. xxi, 2; Ps. xi. 7. ‘The righteous Lord loveth righteousness; > Wn 7a"2D. his counterance doth behold the upright: 0°35 for 325. Andin this prophet, ch. xliv. 15. ‘He maketh it a graven image, 175-720", ‘and he falleth down to it: ‘lamo’ for ‘lo.’ And this is so known, that there 15 scarce any grammarian of their own who hath not taken notice of it; so that this exception also is evidently impertinent.
§ 53. They yet urge further those words, ver. 10: ‘He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days. ‘ This, say they, ‘cannot apply unto any, but to those who have children of their bodies begotten, in whom their days are prolonged.’ Answ. 1. It were well if they would consider the words foregoing, of his making his soul an offering for sin, that is, dying for it, and then tell us how he that doth so can see his carnal seed afterwards, and in them prolong hisdays. 2. He that is here spoken of is directly distinguished from the seed, that is the people of God, so that they cannot be the subject of the prophecy. 3. It is not said that he shall prolong his days in his seed, but he himself shall prolong days after his death; that is upon his resurrection he shall live eternally, which is called length of days. 4. The seed here, are the seed spoken of, Psal. xxu. 30, ‘A seed that shall serve the Lord,’ and be all accounted unto him for a generation; that is, a spiritual seed, as the Gentiles are called the ‘ children of Zion brought forth upon her travailing,’ Isa. Ixvi. 8. Besides, how the Messiah shall obtain this seed is expressed in the next verse: ‘ By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many.’ His seed are such as are converted to God by his doctrine, and justified by faith in him. And to call disciples the seed, the offspring, the children of their masters and instructors, is so common among the Jews, that no phrases or expressions are more in use. Thus speaks expressly this prophet, also, ch. vii. 18: ‘Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me; and who were their children, he declares, ver. 16: ‘Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples: these were the children whom the Lord had given him. And this is the sum of all that which with any appearance of reason is objected against our application of this place to the Messiah; and how weak and trivial it is, is obvious to every ordinary understanding.
§ 54. We may yet add some other testimonies to the same purpose, Daniel tells us, ch. ix. 26, TW” M7D5, ‘Messiah shall be cut off, that is from the land of the living; and that not for himself. And Zech. ix. 9, is said, he shall be ὋΝ, poor; and in his best condition, ‘riding on an ass; which place is interpreted by Solomon Jarchi, and others, of the Messiah. He was also to be pierced, Zech. xii. 10, being the Shepherd, ch. xiii. 7, the N22, the king, as the Targum, that was to be ‘ smitten with the sword of the Lord. The Judge of Israel that was to be smitten with the rod on the cheek, Mic. iv. 1. All denoting his persecution and suffering.
§ 55. Agreeably to these testimonies, the Jews themselves have a tradition about the sufferings of the Messiah, which sometimes breaks forth amongst them. In Midrash Tehillim, on Psal. ii., ‘Rabbi Hana, in the name of Rabbi Idi, says that the Messiah must bear the third part of the affliction that shall ever be in the world. And R. Machir, in Abkath Rochel, affirms that ‘God inquired of the soul of the Messiah, at the beginning of the creation, whether he would endure sufferings and afflictions for the purging away the sins of his people; to which he answered, that he would bear them with joy. And that these sufferigs of the Messiah are such, as that without the consideration of them no rational account can be given of any of their services or sacrifices, shall in our exposition be fully declared. Now upon these testimonies it is evident, that the great argument used by the Jews to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was not the true Messiah, namely, his meanness, poverty, persecutions, and sufferings in this world, doth strongly confirm the truth of our faith, that he only was so indeed,
§ 56. To these charactérs given of the Messiah, we might also subjoin other invincible arguments, proving our Lord Jesus Christ to be he that was promised. I shall add only some few of them, and that very briefly, because they have been in a special manner at large insisted on by others.
First, then, To the Jews he testified of himself that he was the Messiah, and that those who believed not that he was so should perish in their sins. And because, according to a general rule he granted, that though the testimony which he gave concerning himself, being the testimony of the Son of God, was true, yet that it might be justly liable to exception amongst them, he therefore appeals, for the confirmation of his assertion, to the works that he wrought; resting the decision of the question about his testimony on the nature of his works, and freeing them from the obligation to believe in him, if his works were not such as no other man ever wrought, or ever could work, but the Messiah only. ‘The works,’ saith he, ‘that my Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me, John v. 36; that is, to be the Messiah. His own record he asserts to be true, and he appeals also to the testimony of. John; but he shows it to be inferior to those other witnesses which he had, namely, the Scripture and his own works. And so also, ch. x. 37, he says, ‘If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.’
§ 57. Many things might be insisted on for the confirmation of this argument. I shall only point at the heads of them; nor is there more necessary unto our present purpose.
First. All true and real miracles are effects of divine power. Many things prodigious, marvellous, or monstrous, differing from the common and ordinary productions of nature, may be brought forth by an extraordinary concurrence of causes. Many marvellous things may be wrought by the great, hidden, and to us unknown power of wicked spirits: many things may have an appearance of prodigy and wonder, by the force of some deceit, pretence, or delusion, which attends the exhibition of them. But real miracles are effects so above, beside, or contrary to the nature and efficacy of any or all natural causes, that by no application or disposition of them, though never so uncouth and unusual, can they be produced. Miracles, therefore, must of necessity be the effects of an almighty creating power, causing somewhat to exist in matter or manner out of nothing, or out of that which is more adverse unto the being or manner of existence given unto it. Such are the works of raising the dead, opening the eyes of men born blind, &c. And this position the Jews will not deny, seeing _ they make it the foundation of their adherence to the law of Moses.
§ 58. Secondly. When God puts forth his miracle-working power, in the confirmation of any word or doctrine, he avows it to be of, and from himself; to be absolutely and infallibly true, setting the fullest and openest seal unto it which men, who cannot discern his essence or being, are capable of receiving or discerning. And therefore when a doctrine, in itself such as becometh the holiness and righteousness of God, is confirmed by the emanation of his divine power in the working of miracles, no greater evidence of the truth of it can be given, even by God himself.
§ 59. Thirdly, The Lord Jesus, in the days of his fiesh, wrought many great, real miracles, in the confirmation of the testimony that he gave concerning himself, that he was the Christ, the Son of God: see John v. 20, vil. 31, x. 25, xii. 37. Greater confirmation it could not have. Now, that the Lord Jesus wrought the miracles recorded by the evangelists, with others innumerable that are not recorded, (see John xx. 30, xxi. 25,) we have in general all the testimony, evidence, and means of certainty, that any man can possibly have of things which he saw not done with his own eyes. And to suppose that a man can have no assurance of any thing but of what he sees or feels himself, as it overthrows all the foundations of knowledge, and of all human society, yea, of every thing that as men we either do, or know; so when this is granted, it will necessarily follow that we know not the things that we see, any longer than whilst we see them; and perhaps not even then, seeing the evidence we have of knowing any thing by our senses proceeds from principles and presumptions which we never saw, nor ever can see. These things, however, need not be insisted on, for in reasoning with the Jews, we have all the advantage for the confirmation of what we affirm, that we either need to desire, or that the subject can admit of.
§ 60. First, We plead our own records, that are written by the evangelists. And here we have but one request to make to the Jews, namely, that they would lay no exceptions against them, which they know to be of equal force against the writings of Moses and all the prophets. If they declare themselves to be such bedlamites, as to set their own houses on fire, for no other end but to endanger those of their neighbours; if they will destroy the principles of their own faith and religion, to cast the broken pieces of them at the heads of Christians; if they cry, ‘pereant amici dummodo et pereant inimici, they are not fit to be any longer contended with. I desire then to know what objection the Jews can make to this record, which mutatis mutandis may not be made to the Mosaic writings. And if they have always held all such objections to be invalid, when opposed to the evidences on which they believe those writings, why will they not give us leave to affirm the same of these objections, when urged against the New Testament Scriptures, which we receive and believe on no less certain testimonies and evidences? Unless, then, they can plead something against the credit of our writers, or disprove that which is written by them, from records of equal weight with them, (which they can never do, nor do they attempt it,) they have nothing reasonable to plead in this cause. To tell us that they do not believe what is written by them, and that their forefathers did not believe it, is, as to themselves, no more than what we know, and as to their forefathers, is nothing but what those very writers testify concerning them. To expect, then, a proof of the consent of their fathers to that record, while the record itself witnesseth that they dissented from it, is to overthrow the record and all that is contained in it. The Jews, then, have nothing to oppose to this testimony, but only their own unbelief; which, for all the reasons that have been insisted on, cannot be admitted as any just objection. History or circumstance they have none to oppose to it.
§ 61]. Secondly. We plead the notoriety of the miracles wrought by Christ, and the tradition delivering them down unto us. This also the Jews plead concerning the miracles of Moses. They were, say they, openly wrought in the sight of all Israel, and that they were so wrought, the testimony of Israel in succeeding ages is, next to the writings themselves, the best and only witness which they can produce. And wherein doth our testimony come short of theirs? Nay, both on account of their first notoriety, and: also of succeeding tradition, our evidence far exceeds what they have to plead. For the miracles of Moses were indeed wrought openly, but the most of them were wrought only in the sight of that one people, whom he had under his own conduct, and in a wilderness remote from any converse with other nations; and that in the dark times of the world, when men were generally stupid and credulous, as having not been imposed on by the delusions by which the following ages were awakened. The Jews also lay no greater weight on any miracles, than on those which were wrought in the wilderness of Midian, which had no witness unto them but that of Moses himself. But the miracles of Jesus were all, or most of them, wrought before the eyes of multitudes, envying, hating, and persecuting ἢ him; and that in the most knowing days of the world, when reason and Jearning had improved the light of the minds of men to the utmost of their capacity. They were wrought upon multitudes for sundry years together, and were all of them sifted by his adversaries, to try if they could discover any thing of deceit in them. And although his personal ministry was confined to one nation, yet the miracles wrought by his disciples in hig name and by his power, for the confirmation of his being the Messiah, were spread all the world over; so that all mankind were first filled with the report of them, and then satisfied with their truth: and lastly, the generality of them with faith in him, whom they directed unto. The notoriety, therefore, of his miracles far exceeds that of those of Moses. And for the means whereby the certainty of them is continued unto us, whether we respect the number of persons confirming it, or their quality, or their having no temptation from any carnal advantage, or their suffering for their testimony; it is notorious that the secluded circumstances of the Jews could not afford evidence which can in any way be compared with it. So that we may truly say, that no Jew can on any rational account give credit to the truth of the miracles wrought by Moses, and deny it to the record of those which were wrought by the Lord Jesus.
§ 62. But yet there seems somewhat further necessary in this case. Though there were miracles wrought by our Saviour, yet they might be every way inferior to those which were wrought by Moses, and so not sufficient to confirm a doctrine and authority removing and abolishing the laws and customs instituted by Moses. And to this the Jews of old seemed to have had respect, in their constant tumultuous calling after signs and miracles. And hence, though the Lord Christ sometimes pleaded with them the works that he wrought, leaving’ them to stand and fall according to their evidence, John xv. 24, x. 37; as did the apostles also, Acts ii. 22, to the astonishment of all, and to the satisfaction of the less obdurate, John vii. 31, xii. 37; yet Jesus constantly refused to gratify their curiosity and unbelief, when they required any sign or miracle of him, Matt. xii. 38, 39, xvi. 4; Luke xi. 29. And the apostle Paul expressly condemns the requiring of a sign, as that which in the preaching of the gospel was not to be gratified, nor much attended unto, 1 Cor. i. 22. But yet there is not, on this account, any strength wanting to our argument. For although it be not at all necessary, that he who comes with an after revelation of the will of God, reversing any thing before established, should be attested to with more miracles, or with more signal miracles, than he or they were, who were the instruments of the first revelation of things to be repealed; seeing no more is required but that he be sufficiently evidenced to be sent of God, which may be done by one true real miracle, as well as by a thousand; yet the wisdom of God hath so ordered things, that the miracles wrought by the Lord Jesus did on many accounts exceed those wrought by Moses, as by a comparison in some particular instances will appear.
§ 63. First. The number of them gives them the preeminence. The Jews contend that there were seventy-six miracles wrought by Moses; whereas those of all other prophets, as they observe, amount but to seventyfour; for so do they lay hold on every occasion to exalt him, who yet judgeth and condemneth them. To make up this number, they reckon up sundry things that happened about his birth and death, far enough from miracles wrought by him, or in the confirmation of his ministry. The add also every extraordinary work of God that fell out in his days, to the same purpose. Be it so then, that so many miracles were wrought by Moses, as we are far from wishing to diminish any thing of the glory of his ministry, yet what are these compared to the miracles wrought by Christ and by his apostles, in his name, and by his power and authority? Those that are recorded, as wrought by~himself, are not easily reckoned up, and yet those that are written are far the least part of what he did perform, and that in the space of three or four years; whereas those of Moses were scattered over the whole course of his life, for a hundred and twenty years. Thus John assures us that he did many more signs besides those that are written, ch. xx. 30, 31; and that John’s testimony is equal to that of Moses, we have proved before. He adds, that the world could not contain the books that might be written of his miracles, ch. xxi. 25; by which usual hyperbole a great multitude is designed.
Nor did the writers of the story of the gospel agree to give an account of all the miracles that were wrought by the author of it, but only to leave on record a sufficient number of instances of his divine power in the effecting of them. For this end they singled out works that were attended with some disputes or preachings, tending to the opening and_ confirmation of the doctrine of the gospel. Thus when the disciples of John came to him, it is said, Luke vii. 21, ‘In that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits, and unto many that were blind he gave sight. No particular account of any of these cures is given, nor would that season have been at all remembered, had it not been for the sake of the persons who were then sent unto him; the works which they saw being made the ground of that answer which he returned to their master, ver. 22; ‘ Go teil John the things which ye have seen and heard, how that the blind see, ἅς. Considering, therefore, what is elsewhere written, of all the regions about bringing in their sick, weak, and impotent, and of the cures of persons by the touching of his garment, it is evident that his personal miracles amounted to thousands, which might well give occasion to the hyperbole used by John in recounting them. Hence some among the Jews were convinced that he was the Messiah, not only by the greatness, but also by the number of his works, John vii. 31: ‘ Many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these, which this man doeth? Now what are the seventysix miracles of Moses unto those of Christ, as to number? and it is in the number of the miracles of Moses that the Jews in the first place glory. And if we may add those which were wrought by his power, by them that preached the gospel by commission from him, as they are all of the same efficacy to the end proposed, namely, the confirmation of his being the Messiah, they amount not unto thousands only, but probably unto millions. For of this sort were all the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost that were granted to’ the church all the world over. So that as to the number of miracles, he was by them sufficiently attested as the Messiah, the great Lawgiver of the people of the new. covenant.
§ 64. Again, The Jews insist greatly on this, that all other prophets wrought miracles by the iritervention of prayer, and that Moses alone, without prayer, wrought miracles at his own pleasure. The rod, they say, was committed unto him as a kingly sceptre, to denote that authority to which the whole nature of things submitted. It is true indeed it is not recorded that Moses prayed in words before every miracle that was wrought by him, or in reference to his ministry; but yet this is plain in the history, that he wrought no mighty work, but either upon his prayer, or some express command and direction from God in particular, which events the Judaical pretence of a power remaining with him, enabling him to work miracles when and how he would. But this which they falsely ascribe to Moses, was eminently true of the Lord Jesus. Those thousands of miraculous works which he wrought, were the arbitrary effects of a word or command, without any special direction for every new work; arguing the constant presence of an infinite power with him exerted according to his will. ‘ Come forth of him—come out of the grave—I will—Be thou clean—Be ye opened, and the like expressions, he used as signs and pledges thereof. It was not thus with Moses, as the story manifests; yea, he himself greatly doubted of the greatest effect of the divine power put forth by him, when he smote the rock to bring forth water.
§ 65. The nature also of the miracles wrought by the one and the other may be compared; and we shall see from thence also on which side the preeminence will, be found. The miracles wrought by Moses, or by God himself, whilst he employed Moses in the giving the law, and in the deliverance of the people, were for the most part portentous prodigies, suited to fill men with wonder, astonishment, and fear. Such were all the signs of the presence of God on Mount Sinai, The effects also of most of them, were evil and destructive, proceeding from wrath and indignation against sin and sinners. Such were all the mighty works wrought in Egypt, such was also the swallowing up of Dathan and Abiram, in the wilderness. Those that tended to the good and relief of mankind, as the bringing of water from the rock, were typical and occasional. Miracles of an alarming nature were suited to the ministry of death and condemnation, which was committed to Moses. But on the other side, the mighty works of the Lord Jesus were evidently effects of goodness, as well as of power, consisting in things useful and helpful unto mankind. Healing the sick, opening the eyes of the blind, and the ears of the deaf, and giving strength to the lame, casting out of devils, feeding hungry multitudes, and raising the dead, are things amiable and useful. And though terrible prodigies may more affect and astonish the minds of carnal men, such as the Jews in general were, yet works of grace and goodness do more allure those who attend to the dictates of right reason. ‘These merciful works were evidences of a gracious ministry, tending to salvation and peace in every kind, such as that of the Messiah was promised to be. As miracles then were the tokens of their several ministries, and bespake the nature of them, those of the Lord Christ were exceedingly more excellent than those of Moses.
§ 66. Furthermore, as Moses had not a power of working miracles constantly resident with him, which he might exert according to his own will, so he was very far from being able to communicate any such power unto others. God indeed took of the Spirit that was on him, and gave it unto the elders that were to be joined with him in the government of the people, Numb. xi. 25; but this Spirit conveyed only ability to government, and no power of working miracles went along with it. Moreover, the communication of this Spirit was not any act of Moses at all. But now our Lord Jesus, as he had the divine power mentioned always with him, so he could give authority and power unto whom he pleased, to effect all such miraculous works, as were any way necessary for the confirmation of their doctrine. Of this nature was the commission which he gave to the twelve when he sent them forth, Matt. x. 8. ‘Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils.’ As also that to the seventy, Luke x.17—19. Yea, he promised them, which also came to pass, that by his power and presence with them, ‘they should do greater things than those which they had seen him to do, John xiv. 12; Mark xvi. 17. And this difference is so eminent, that nothing can be objected against it. This more evidently confirmed him to be the Messiah, than all the mighty works which he wrought in his own person on the earth.
67. Again, all the miracles of Moses ended with his life. The Jews indeed some of them tell us a number of foolish stories about his death, which, as their manner is, they would fix on those words, Deut. xxxiv. 5. ‘ And Moses died, mm “5 dy, by the mouth or word of the Lord. Here they tell us how Moses contended with nar x27, ‘the angel of death,’ and drove him away with his rod, so that he could not die, till God laid his mouth unto his, and so took out his soul from him. But these figments are shameful, and such as become none but themselves. However these things extended only unto his death: then ended his ministry and miracles. But now the greatest miracle of our Lord Jesus was wrought by him, after the violent and cruel death which he underwent for our sakes. For he took his life again, and raised himself from the dead, John x. 17, 18. This being performed by him, after the dissolution of his human nature, in the open visible separation of his body and soul, in which state it was utterly impossible that that nature should put forth any act for retrieving its former condition, manifested his existence in another superior nature, acting with power on the human nature in the same person. And this one miracle was a sufficient vindication of the truth which he had taught concerning himself, namely, that he was the Messiah the Son of God.;And though any should question his being raised from the dead by his own power, yet the evidence is uncontrollable, that he was raised again by the power of God, without the application of the means and ministry of any other, whereby the holy and eternal God of truth confirmed all that he had taught concerning his person and office while he was alive. And this leaves no room for hesitation in this matter; for if it is granted that he was raised by the power of God no man will deny that he was the Messiah, and on what principles we proceed for the proof of his resurrection, in reasoning with the Jews, hath been before declared.
§ 68. To what has been thus summarily recounted, we may lastly add, the continuance of the miracles wrought by his power, after his leaving of this world, and his ascension into heaven. For there is in this an additional evidence. For whereas the miraculous works that were wrought by himself, and by his disciples while he conversed with them in the flesh, were confined, as we observed before, to the land of Canaan; they who afterwards received power from above by his grant, continued to work the like miracles all the world over; so that within the space of a few years, there was scarcely a famous town or city in the world, in which some of his disciples had not received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. And this also distinctly proves him to be the promised Messiah; for whereas the isles of the Gentiles were to wait for, and receive his law, it was necessary that among them also it should receive this solemn kind of attestation from heaven. f
§ 69. Now from what has been spoken, it appears that the miracles wrought by Jesus were not only sufficient to confirm the testimony which he gave concerning himself, namely, that he was the promised Messiah, the Son of God, but also that they were much more emiment than those wherewith God was pleased to confirm the ministry of Moses in the giving of the - law: so that the Jews have no reason to question his authority to abrogate any institutions of worship, to the observance of which they had formerly been bound.
§ 70. To close this argument, I shall now manifest that the Jews of old were convinced of the truth of the miracles wrought by the Lord Jesus, and in doing this, I shall in some measure discover the vanity of those pretences by which they attempt to shield themselves from the natural consequences of that conviction.
1. The convictions of those who lived in his own days, appear from Matt. xxvii. 1]—14; John vii. 31. ix. 16; Acts iv. 16; xix. 13. Neither did they at any time dispute his works, but only the power whereby they were wrought; of which afterwards.
2. The fame and reputation of his miracles was such amongst them, that they who made an art and trade of casting out devils, used the invocation of the name of Jesus over those who were possessed; for to this they were evidently induced, by the notoriety of his exerting his divine power in that kind of works. Thus we read, Acts xix. 13, that they adjured the spirits by the name of Jesus, whom Paul preached, because they observed the miracles that were wrought in that name. For being ignorant of the true way and means by which the apostle wrought his miraculous works, they, after the manner of magicians, used the name of him whom he preached, in their exorcisms. For it was ever the custom of that sort of men, to intermix their charms with the names of such persons as they knew to have excelled in mighty works. And that this was common among the Jews of those days, is evident from Luke ix. 49, which could proceed from nothing but from a general consent in the acknowledgment of the works wrought by him.
3. We have also hereunto the suffrage of ‘the Talmudical rabbins themselves, the most malicicous adversaries that ever the Lord Jesus had in this world. They intend not indeed to bear witness to his miracles; but whilst they relate stories that were continued among them by tradition, and whilst they endeavour to shield their unbelief from the arguments taken from them, they tacitly acknowledge that they were indeed wrought by him. This I say they do, while they labour to show by what means those prodiies and wondrous works which are recorded of him, were wrought and effected. For they who say that that this or that was the way whereby such a thing was accomplished, do plainly acknowledge, that the thing was accomplished. Greater evidence of their conviction it is impossible for such men to give, and for our argument we need to desire no greater.
§ 71. First. In the Talmud itself they have traditional stories of miracles wrought by the disciples of Jesus, and by others i his name, and although these are like the rest of their narrations, foolish and insipid, yet they evidence the tradition thas was amongst them from the forementioned conviction. Thus in Aboda Zara they have a story concerning James, who lived longest amongst them. It happened, they say, that Eleacer the son of Dama, was bitten by a serpent, and James of the village of Sechania, that is Bethany, came to cure him in the name of Jesus, the son of Pandira; but R. Ishmael opposed him, and said, It is not lawful for thee thou son of Dama. So owning that miracles and cures were wrought by James in the name of Jesus. And in Sabbat. Hierusal. Distinct. Shemona Sheraticin, they tell us that the son of Rab. Jose the son of Levi had swallowed poison; a certain man came and communed with him in the name of Jesus the son of Pandira, and he was healed; but when he was gone out, one said unto him, How didst thou adjure him, he said, By such a word; the other re- " plied, That it had been better for him to have died, than to have heard that — word. I mention these things only to show that they were never able to stifle the tradition that passed among themselves, concerning the miracles wrought by Jesus and his disciples. |
§ 72. But this conviction more evidently discovers itself in their endeayours to assign his mighty works to other causes, so that they may not from them be forced to acknowledge his divine power, and the presence of God with him. And there are two pretences which they make use of. The first is that of their forefathers, Matt.xii. 24. They would have the devil to be the author of them, and that he wrought them by magical incantations. This they pleaded of old; and to this some of them pretend to adhere to this day; the folly of which blasphemy both reflects upon themselves, and may be fully proved to have no application to him, whom to their eternal ruin they seek to reproach. For,
First. Do they not know, that Moses was generally esteemed by the wisest of the heathens, to have been skilled in magic? So Pliny and Apuleius testify, and Celsus contends at large, that it was by means of magic that he wrought wonders. And can the Jews fix ona course more likely to confirm such a suspicion in the minds of atheistical scoffers, than by their own taking up the same accusation against the author of more, and greater miracles wrought by Moses? What answer can they give to the reproaches of an infidel, while they’ themselves with more open impudence, bring the same accusation against the Lord Jesus? Besides, as is confessed, Egypt was the very source of magical incantations, the world’s academy for that diabolical cunning, for there, and almost nowhere else, magic was had in honour. Now in the court of the king of Egypt, Moses had his education, and conversation for forty years. How much more just then, though still most unjust, would the supposition be, that Moses was skilled in that wisdom falsely so called, than that our Lord Jesus acquired this art of magic in Egypt, who was driven thither by persecution, and who returned from thence while yet in his infancy. So that in his whole vain pretence they do nothing but attempt to cast down their own foundations.
Secondly. Neither indeed do they account the skill in, and use of magical incantations a crime, but an excellency. Josephus would have us believe that the art of magic, and the invention of incantations, was part of the wisdom of Solomon. And their Talmudical doctors do expressly approve of that diabolical art. Nothing then but extreme malice and desperation, could lead them to use this cloak for their infidelity, which not only opposes the foundation of their own profession, but which also involves a contradiction to those principles, which at other times they ayouch. So that Rabbi Achor was mistaken when he gave that out as a prophecy, which indeed is a history, namely, that a generation of ungodly men among the Jews would not believe the things that the Messiah should do, but should affirm that he doth them by magical art.
§ 73. As for the blasphemy itself, no other answer needs to be given to it, but what was returned by our Lord Jesus of old. If these things had been done by magical incantations, and consequently by the assistance of the Devil, it must proceed from a division of those wicked spirits among themselves, and that with respect to the main design of their kingdom, dominion and interest in this world. The open and avowed work of our Lord Jesus in this world, was by all ways and means to overthrow the kingdom of Satan and to destroy his works. This he privately taught, this he publicly declared to be the main end of his coming into the world. The works and miracles which he wrought were very many, innumerable of them were exercised against devils themselves, to their shame and terror, and to their expulsion from the habitation which they had invaded. During this work, he declares to all the world that these spirits are evil, wicked, malicious, unclean, and lying, reserved for everlasting destruction in hell, under the wrath of the great God. For this cause, they on the other side ceased not to oppose him, and to stir up all the world against him, until they thought they had prevailed in his death. If then, men will imagine that the works of Christ, which are against the interest and person of Satan, and which put him to open shame; works which were wrought to confirm a doctrine that teaches all the world to avoid Satan, to abhor him, to fight and contend against him, that commends every thing which he hates, and that gives promises of life eternal to them who forsake him, and maintain his quarrel against him, and that threatens every thing that Satan loves, and labours to promote in the world with eternal vengeance; if men will imagine that these works confirming this doctrine were wrought by Satan’s assistance, they had more need to be sent to the place where the maladies of those distracted of their wits are attended to, than to have an answer given to their folly.
§ 74. They have yet another pretence by which they try to harden themselyes against conviction. But it is so perfectly Judaical, that is, so full of monstrous and ridiculous figments, that nothing but a design to discover their present desperate folly, and to show with what unmanly inventions they endeavour to resist their own convictions, can afford an excuse for the repetition of it. Besides, the fable itself is vulgarly known; I shall, palace only give a brief compendium of it, seeing it may not be wholly avoided.
The story they tell us is this: there was a stone in the Sanctum Sanctorum, under the ark, on which was written Shem Hamphorash,—(so the Cabalists call the name Jehovah.) He that could learn this name, might by the virtue of it, do what miracles he pleased. Wherefore, the wise men fearing what might happen, made two brazen dogs, and set them on two pillars before the door of the sanctuary: and itwas so, that when any one went in, and learned that name, as he came out, these dogs barked so horribly, that they frighted him, and made him forget the name that he had leamed. But Jesus of Nazareth going in, wrote the name in parchment, and put it within the skin of his leg, and closed the skin upon it; so that, though he lost the remembrance of it at his coming out, by the barking of the brazen dogs, yet he recovered the knowledge of it again out of the parchment in his leg; and by virtue thereof, he wrought miracles, walked on the sea, cured the lame, raised the dead, and opened the eyes of the blind. From this story we mean only to infer that the most stubborn of the Jews must have been convinced of the miracles of our blessed Saviour. Had these not been openly performed and undeniably attested, no creatures that ever had the shape of men, or any thing more of modesty than the brazen dogs which they talk of, would have had recourse to such monstrous and foolish figments, to countenance their rejection of him and of his miracles. He that should contend that the sun did not shine all the last year, and should give this reason of his assertion, that a certain man of his acquaintance climbed up to heaven by a ladder, and put him in a box, and kept him close in his chamber all that while; that man would speak to the full, with as much probability and appearance of truth, as the grand Rabbins do in this tale. Kvery word in their story is a monster. The stone, the writing of the name of God on it, the virtue of the pronunciation of that name, the entrance of a private man into the Sanctum Sanctorum, the barking of the dogs, all are dreams becoming men under a penal infatuation and blindness, not much distant from those chains of darkness wherewith Satan himself is kept bound unto the judgment of the great day.
§ 75. Fourthly. We must not forget the testimony of his disciples who conversed with him, and were eye witnesses of his miracles, especially of his rising from the dead. These, with multitudes assured of the truth by their testimony, willingly suffered the loss of all temporal interests, and exposed themselves to innumerable dangers, in bearing witness to it in the world. And at last they sealed their testimony with their blood, which was shed by the most exquisite tortures that the malice of hell could invent. Now, all this they did in expectation of acceptance with him, and a reward from him, which depended on the truth of the miracles which they asserted him to have wrought. From all these considerations we may safely conclude, that it is utterly impossible that the nature of man should be more ascertained of any thing that ever was in the world, than we may be of the miracles wrought by our Lord Jesus. Now all these we have declared, were wrought by the power of God to confirm the truth of his being the promised Messiah. And if this were not so, it is impossible that God should ever require an assent unto any revelation of his mind or will, no revelation being capable of a more evident and full confirmation than this truth hath received, that Jesus is the Christ. The application of this consideration, particularly to his resurrection from the dead, hath been the special subject of so many writers, that I shall not farther insist upon it.
i 76. One argument more, taken from the success that the doctrine of Jesus hath had in the world, shall close this discourse. How poor his outward condition was in this world, we acknowledge, and in this the Jews triumph. His poverty, and the contempt and reproach that he was exposed to, was one of the chief pretences that they had, and have to this day, for their refusal of him. The time when he came, was the time, as has been shown, when the Jews were in daily expectation of their Messiah, and when the residue of mankind were in the full enjoyment of all that light, wisdom, and knowledge, which the principles of nature could afford. In this state of things, a poor man, living in an obscure village of Galilee, not taught by men so much as to read, begins to preach, and to declare himself to be the Messiah, the Son of God, the Saviour of the world. With this testimony he declares a doctrine destructive of the religion and sacred worship of every man then living in the world; of the Jews as to the manner of it, which they esteemed above its substance; and with respect to all other men, his doctrine was destructive of the very nature and being of their religion, and enjoined a course of obedience to God, decried by them all. ‘To encourage men to believe him, and to accept of his testimony, he gives them promises of what he would do for them when this life should be ended. No sooner doth he undertake this work, but the Jews among - whom he conversed, almo&t universally, at least, all the great, the wise, the learned, and they who were esteemed devout amongst them, set themselves to scorn, despise, reproach, and persecute him. And from this course they ceased not, until, conspiring with the power of the Gentiles, they removed him out of the world as a malefactor, by a bitter, shameful, and ignominious death. After this, he riseth again from the dead, and shows himself neither to Jews nor Gentiles in general, but only to some poor men chosen by himself to be his witnesses and apostles. These begin to teach both Jews and Gentiles the things before mentioned. The Jews more deeply engaged than formerly, by having slain their Master, immediately persecute the servants, and that unto death. The Gentiles‘at first deride and scorn them, but quickly change their conduct, and set all their wit and power at work to extirpate them and their followers out of the world. The Jews, on many accounts looked upon themselves as ruined for ever, if the testimony of these men were admitted. The Gentiles saw that on the same supposition they must abandon all their religion, and with it, every thing with which they pleased themselves in this world. Invisible infernal powers who ruled in the world by superstition and idolatry, were no less engaged against them. With them was neither human wisdom or counsel, nor external force; yea, the use of both in their work was by their master severely interdicted to them. Had not the truth and power of God been engaged in support of this undertaking, it is such madness to suppose that it could have been carried to that issue in the conquest of mankind, which it at length obtained, that no man not utterly forsaken of reason, or. cursed with blindness of mind, or made senseless and stupid by the power of his lusts, can make himself guilty of it. Many are the branches of this argument, and many the considerations that concur in contributing evidence and strength unto it; but to examine and follow out these, is beyond our present design. ‘The bare statement of the argument is sufficient to banish all Jewish exceptions from the minds of sober and reasonable men. With this argument, then, we finish the third part of our general thesis concerning the Messiah; and from it, in connexion with those which we formerly stated, we conclude that Jesus of Nazareth whom Paul preached, was He. x 2
§ 1. Objections of the Jews against the Doctrine of Christianity. § 2. Their principal argument to prove the Messiah not yet come. General answer. Principles leading to a right understanding of the promises concerning the Messiah. § 3. Redemption and salvation promised by him spiritually. Folly and self-contradiction of the Jews, that expect only temporal deliverance by him. § 4. Promises of temporal things, accessory and occasional. Thence conditional. The general condition of them all suited to the nature and duration of the kingdom of the Messiah. § 5. Spiritual things promised in words which first signify things temporal. Reasons thereof. Of peace with God, and in the world. § 6. Seed of Abraham, Jacob, Israel, Sion, Jerusalem. Who and what intended thereby. § 7. All nations; the world; the Gentiles in the promise, who. § 8, 9. Promises suited unto the duration of the kingdom of the Messiah. § 10. The calling and flourishing state of the Jews thereon. § 11. Particular promises may not be understood, or understood amiss, without prejudice to the faith, § 12. Application of these principles. § 13, 14. Promise of universal peace in the days of the Messiah; Isa. ii. 2, 3, 4, 5, considered. § 15. Jewish objections from it, answered. Outward peace how intended. § 16. Promises of the diffusion of the knowledge of God. Of unity in his worship, Jer. xxxi. 54; Zeph. iii. 9; Zech. xiv. 9, fulfilled. §17—19. Jewish objection answered. § 20. Promises concerning the restoration and glorious estate of Israel. § 21. Fulfilled to the spiritual Israel. To the Jews in the appointed season. Their calling, and peace ensuing thereon.
§ 1. Tuat which remains for a conclusion to these dissertations, isthe consideration of those reasons and arguments with which the present Jews do endeavour, as their forefathers for many generations have endeavoured, to defend their obstinacy and unbelief. And in this we shall engage with as much briefness as the nature of the matter treated of, will admit. Many are the books which they have written, mostly in the Hebrew tongue, and some in other languages, but in the Hebrew character, against Christians and their religion. To some of these they have given triumphant and insulting titles, as though they had undoubtedly obtained a perfect victory over their adversaries. But the books themselves in nothing answer their specious frontispieces. Take away wilful mistakes, gross paralogisms, false stories, and some few grammatical niceties, and they vanish into nothing. What is spoken by them or for them, which seems to have any weight, shall be produced and examined.