Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

This is what I afferted, (page 85-89,) and in which there is not a word, that can fairly be conftrued as afferting that the Meffiah was to be lineally defcended from Solomon in preference to Nathan; as I only took notice of the contradictions between the two Evangelifts; and that one made Jefus defcend from Solomon, and the other made him defcend from Nathan. And, as I have fhewn that the genealogies do both properly belong to Jofeph, I think it is clear from thence, that the Doctor has not advanced any thing that in the least weakens my position.

As to Mr. SWAIN, he only obferves, (page 74,) that," Bishop KIDDER, in his demonftration of "the Meffiah, has employed ten chapters to con"fider the objections of the Jews against the ac"count which the Evangelifts give of the genea"logy of Jefus. Here Mr. Levi will find his ob

jections fairly flated, and, I think, fatisfactorily "answered." But is it not very furprising, that our of all thofe TEN CHAPTERS Written by the Bishop, Mr. Swain, has not produced one clear and fatisfactory proof to invalidate my objection? As he has not, I have a right to take it for granted that he CANNOT; confequently, my objection remains in its full force.

Neither has Anti-Socinus, alias Anfelm Bayly weakened it; for he only* obferves, "As to the hole, which you would pick in the coat of Mat"thew and Luke, refpecting the genealogy of

• Second Remarks, page 30.

« Christ,

[ocr errors]

"Chrift, it is but fmall, and of no importance, "whether any one can mend it or not." This is fo far from weakening the force of my objection, that on the contrary it fhews it to be unanfwerable. For if fo learned and zealous a Chriftian Prieft, cannot advance any thing fatisfactory to confute it, but in order to evade the force of it, treats it ́as, “but small, and of no importance,” while a Bishop thought it of fuch importance, as to employ TEN CHAPTERS upon it; and another learned divine, Dr. Berryman, has alfo in his fermons treated it with much care and accuracy, befides a number of others that have written on the fubject, I think, it is an irrefragable proof that he is unable to confute it.

I am, &c.

LETTER

LETTER III.

Of the Sufferings of the Jewish Nation, and the explanation of the Seventy Weeks, &c.

DEAR SIR,

You

OU obferve, (page 32, Letters, Part. II.) "As an argument of your nation having "offended God beyond any thing that is recorded " in the Books of the Old Teftament, I requested you to attend to the extreme feverity of your prefent fufferings, and the long continuance of

сс

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

your banishment from your own country; and "I faid, that a captivity of feventy years was "deemed fufficient punishment for all your tranf"greffions preceding that event." You farther observe," Mr. Levi replies, that the Babylonish

[ocr errors]

I captivity was not a punishment for all the fins " of the preceding period." You then proceed to quote what I have faid, page 45, and 49. After which you observe, "Thus does Mr. Levi interpret Daniel's famous prophecy of feventy weeks, of which he gives the following account, << page 40."-After having given this quotation * alfo, you proceed page 34. "But the language "of the prophecy clearly indicates that the termi "nation of this longer period of feven times "seventy years, would be fome joyful event, and

I forbear citing all the quotations, to avoid fwelling this publication to an enormous bulk.

not

[ocr errors]

"not a calamitous one. For it was to finifh

[ocr errors]

tranfgreffion, to make an end of fin, to make "reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlafting righteoufnefs, and to feal up the vifion,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(which Mr. Levi renders, page 55, by publicly "authenticating it) and to anoint the moft holy." Could this be the beginning of forrows? This objection of your's is fo far from weakening my pofition, that on the contrary it adds force to the explanation which I have given of the prophecy. For I obferved page 44-48. But, verily, as to Ifrael, he would not only wait Jeventy years, but feven times feventy years, after which, their kingdom fhould be cut off and their dominion cease, and they return into captivity. That is, God would allow them fo long time to repent of their fins; and that they might the better be enabled fo to do, God stirred up Cyrus to give them leave to build a temple, that they might thereby be able to offer facrifices, &c. But, if during that time they should not repent, (as was actually the cafe) they were then to go into captivity, that by their fufferings therein, they will be able to finish (or more properly to confume)* tranfgreffion, and to make an end of fins, and to make expiation for iniquity. And therefore, this is fo far from being "fome joyful event," that on the contrary it is a prediction of farther calamities, as may be perceived from the whole prophecy,

• See Lingua Sacra, Radix .

but.

but especially the clofe of it; and as you yourself acknowledge, page 35, in contradiction to what you afferted in the preceding page. For you there fay, "One week still remains to make up the fetc venty; but of this the angel gives an account at "the close of the prophecy. It was that week in "the midst of which the facrifice and oblation was "to cease, which was to be the beginning of far"ther calamities." From whence it is manifeft, that the end of the feventy weeks was to be the beginning of farther calamities. And what greater calamity could befall them, than the destruction of the city and the fanctuary, by the people of the prince that fhould come, &c. And they confequently go into captivity. Hence it is clear, that no joyful event is mentioned to take place at the end of the feventy weeks, but a beginning of farther calamities, i. e. their going into captivity. And the calamities which they would fuffer during fo long and dreadful a captivity as this has been, would be the means of confuming tranfgreffion, &c. Agreeable to what the prophet fays, "And I will scatter thee among the nations, and

[ocr errors]

difpérfe thee in the countries, and I will con-. "fume thy filthiness out of thee.*" This certainly means the present captivity, for in the Babylonish captivity, they were not scattered among the nations, nor difperfed in the countries, and confequently, their filthinefs was not confumed: but in

[blocks in formation]
« FöregåendeFortsätt »