Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

Jer. Ixii 5. Christ is the righteous Branch raised unto David, the King

that shall reign and prosper, in whose days Judah shall be saved,

6.

being , iste qui vocabit אשר יקרא לה

[blocks in formation]

מה שמו של מלך המשיח רבי אבא אמר ה'

שמו אשר יקראו ה'

רה שנאמר שמו

12973 What is the name of the Messias ? R. Abba said, Jehovah is his name; as it is said (Jer. xxiii. 6), And this is the name which they shall call him, Jehovah our righteousness. The same he reports of Rabbi Levi. The Rab. bins then, though enemies to the truth which we deduce from thence, constrained by the literal importance of the text, did acknowledge that the name Jehovah did belong to the Mes. sias. And as for the collection of the contrary from the parallel place pretended, there is not so great a similitude as to inforce the same interpretation. For whereas in Jerem. xxiii, 6.

, (his] name, in the xxxiii. 16. it is only 70 without any mention of a name: and surely that place cannot prove Jehovah to be the name of Israel, which speaks not one word of the name of Jerusalem: for where we read in Crellius, 'hoc scilicet nomen est,' all but hoc is not Scripture, but the gloss of Crellius, and hoc itself cannot be warranted for the interpretation of ni nor quo for wwx; the simplest interpretation of those words an

, eam,

he which calleth Jerusalem is the Lord our righteousness, that is, Christ. And thus the first answer of Socinus is invalid: which he easily foreseeing, hath joined with the Jewish Rabbins in the second answer, ad. mitting that Jehovah our righteousness is the name of the Messias, but withal denying that the Christ is that Jehovah. To which purpose they assert those words, Jehovah our righteousness, to be delivered by way of proposition, not of apposition ; and this they endeavour to prove by such places of Scripture as seem to infer as much. As Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah Nissi, Exod. xvii. 15. Gideon built an altar unto the Lord, and called it Jehovah Shalom, Judg. vi. 24. And the name of the city in the last words of Ezekiel is Jehovah Shammah. In all which places it is most certain, that the Jehovah is not predicated of that of whose name it is a part; but is the subject of a proposition, given by way of nomination, whose verb substantive or copula is understood. But from thence to conclude, that the Lord our righteousness can be no otherwise understood of Christ than as a proposition, and that we by calling him so, according to the prophet's prediction, can understand no more thereby, than that God the Father of Christ doth justify us, is most irrational. For first, it is there. fore necessary to interpret those names by way of a proposition of themselves, because Jehovah cannot be the predicate of that which is named; it being most apparent, that an altar or a city built cannot be God: and whatsoever is not Jehovah without addi. tion, cannot be Jchovah with addi. tion. But there is no incongruity in attributing of that name to Christ, to

this is the וזה שמו ,it is expressly said

* The citation from the Midrash Tillim as here given is taken from Martini's Purio Fidci, p. 652. In the editions of Constantinople, 1512; Venice, 1546; and Amsterdam, 1730, the passage is found in a more abrupt and condensed form.

and Israel shall dwell safely; we are assured that this is his Jer. xxii. 5,
name whereby he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness :
the Lord, that is, Jehovah, the expression of his supremacy ;
and the addition of our righteousness can be no diminution to
his majesty. If those words in the prophet, Sing and rejoice, Zech. ii. 10.
O daughter of Sion; for lo, I come, and I will dwell in the
midst of thee, saith the Lord (Jehovah), did not sufficiently of
themselves denote our Saviour who dwelt amongst us, as they
certainly do; yet the words which follow would evince as
much; and many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that Zech. ii. 11.
day, and shall be my people ; and I will dwell in the midst of
thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me
unto thee : for what other Lord can we conceive dwelling in the

midst of us, and sent unto us by the Lord of hosts, but Christ? 149 And as the original Jehovah was spoken of Christ by the

holy prophets; so the title of Lord, as the usual interpretation
of that name, was attributed unto him by the apostles. In
that signal prediction of the first age of the Gospel, God pro-
mised by Joel, that, whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord Joel ii. 32.

whom we have already proved it actually given: and our adversaries who teach that the name Jehovah is sometimes given to the angels representing God, must acknowledge that it may be given unto Christ, whom they confess to be above all angels, and far more fully and exactly to represent the Father. Secondly, That which is the addition in those names can. not be truly predicated of that thing which bears the name. Moses could not say that altar was his exaltation, nor Gideon that it was his peace. And if it could not so be predicated by itself, it could neither be by apposition, and, consequently, even in this respect, it was necessary to make the name a proposition. But our righteousness may undoubtedly be predicated of him, who is here called by the name of the Lord our righteousness: for the apostle hath expressly taught us, that he is made unto us righteousness, 1 Cor. i. 30. And if it may be in itself, there can be no repugnancy in its predication by way of apposition. Thirdly, That addition of

our Righteousness doth not only truly
belong to Christ, but some manner
properly and peculiarly so as in that
notion it can belong to no other person
calledJehovah, but to that Christ alone.
For he alone is the end of the law for
righteousness to everyone that believeth,
Rom. x. 4. And when he is said to
be made unto us righteousness, 1 Cor.
i. 30. he is thereby distinguished from
God the Father. Being then Christ is
thus peculiarly called our righteousness
under the Gospel, being the place of
the prophet forementioned speaketh
of this as a name to be used under the
Gospel, being no other person called
Jehovah is ever expressly called our
righteousness in the Gospel ; it follow-
eth, not only that Christ may be so
called, but that the prophecy cannot
otherwise be fulfilled, than by acknow-
ledging that Christ is the Lord our
righteousness: and, consequently, that
is his name, not by way of proposi.
tion, but of apposition and appropria-
tion; so that being both Jehovah and
our righteousness, he is as truly Je-
hovah as our righteousness.

(Jehovah) shall be delivered : and St Paul hath assured us that
Christ is that Lord, by proving from thence, that whosoever

believeth on him shall not be ashamed; and inferring from that Rom. 1. 9, 11. if we confess with our mouth the Lord Jesus, we shall be saved.

For if it be a certain truth, that whosoever confesseth the Lord
Jesus shall be saved; and the certainty of this truth depend
upon that foundation, that whosoever believeth on him shall not

be ashamed; and the certainty of that in relation to Christ deRom. X. 13. pend upon that other promise, Whosoever shall call on the

name of the Lord shall be saved : then must the Lord in the
thirteenth verse of the tenth chapter to the Romans be the
same with the Lord Jesus in the ninth verse; or else St Paul's
argument must be invalid and fallacious, as containing that in
the conclusion which was not comprehended in the premises.
But the Lord in the ninth verse is no other than Jehovah, as
appeareth by the prophet Joel from whom that scripture is
taken. Therefore our Saviour in the New Testament is called
Lord, as that name or title is the interpretation of Jehovah.

If we consider the office of John the Baptist peculiar unto

him, we know it was he of whom it is written (in the prophet Matt. xi. 10. Malachi), I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the 150

way before me : we are sure he which spake those words was
(Jehovah) the Lord of Hosts; and we are as sure that Christ
is that Lord before whose face John the Baptist prepared the

way. The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, (saith Matt. iii. 3. Isaiah,) Prepare ye the way of the Lord (Jehovah) : and this is

he that was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saith St Matthew,
this is he of whom his father Zachariah did divinely presage,
Thou, child, shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest : for
thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways.
Where Christ is certainly the Lord, and the Lord undeniably
Jehovah'.

Mal. iii. 1.

Isai. xl. 3.

Luke i. 76.

1 I say therefore undeniably, because it is not only the undoubted translation of the name .. in the prophet (which of itself were sufficient); but also is delivered in that manner which is (though unreasonably) required to signify the proper name of God, προπορεύση γάρ προ προσώπου Κυρίου, not του Κυρίου, that is, without, not with, an article. For now our Saviour's Deity must be tried

by a new kind of school divinity, and
the most fundamental doctrine, main-
tained as such ever since the apostles'
times by the whole Catholic Church,
must be examined, censured, and con-
demned, by ó, Ý, . Socinus first
makes use of this observation against
Wiekus: [cap. 3. Respons. ad xi. arg.
Vol. 11. p. 557. col. 1.) and after him
Crellius hath laid it as a grave and
serious foundation, and spread it out

Nor is this the only notation of the name or title Lord taken in a sense divine, above the expression of all mere

into its several corners, to uphold the styled ο Παύλος than simply Παύλος. fabric of his superstructions. First: So Balaam, Gallio, &c. Some persons

Vox Jehovah magis quam cætera Dei we find in the New Testament, whom, nomina propriorum naturam sequitur; if we should stay till we found them ideo etiam Græca Kúplos, cum pro illa without an article, we should never ponitur, propriorum indolem, qua li call by their names at all; as Apelles, cet,æmulatur.'[Lib.de Deo, c. 14. Vol. Balak, &c. Thirdly, ó Kúpos is so III. p. 36.] Secondly: 'Diximus often used for that God who is the propriis nominibus articulum liben Father with an article, and Kúplos for tius subtrahi— licet interim articulum the Son without an article, (for the etiam sæpe concinnitatis potius quam Father Matt. i. 22. ii. 15. v. 33. xxii. necessitatis causa admittant. Idem 44. Mark xii. 36. Luke i. 6. 9. 15. 25. fit in voce Kúplos cum pro Jehovah 46. ii. 15. 22. 23. x. 2. Acts ii. 25. ponitur.' Ibid. Thirdly: 'Hæc est 34. iii. 19. xvii. 27. Rom. xv. 11. 1 causa, cur in Novo Testamento, Cor. x. 26. xvi. 7. 2 Cor. v. 11. Eph. maxime apud Lucam et Paulum, vox v. 17. 19. Col. iii. 16. 20. 23. 2 Thess. Kúplos, cum Deum summum designat, iii. 3. 2 Tim. i. 16. Heb. viii. 2. 11. articulo libentius careat; at cum de xii. 14. Jam. iv. 10. 15. 1 Pet. ii. 3. Christo subjective usurpatur, raro For the Son, Matt. iii. 3. xxii. 43. 45. articulus omittitur.' Ibid. What Mark i. 3. Luke i. 76. ii. 11. iii. 4. strange uncertainties are these, to xx. 44. John i. 23. Acts ii. 36. x. 36. build the denial of so important an xi. 16. 21. xv. 11. Rom. i. 7. X. 9. article as Christ's Divinity upon? 12. xiv. 6. 8. 14. xvi. 2. 8. 11-13. He does not say absolutely Jehovah 22. 1 Cor. i. 3. iv. 17. vii. 22. 25. 39. is the proper name of God, but only ix. 1. 2. x. 21. xi. 11. xii. 3. xiv. 37. that it doth more follow the nature of xv. 58. xvi. 10. 19. 2 Cor. i. 2. ii. 12. proper names than the other names of iv. 5. X. 17. xi. 17. xii. 1. Gal. i. 3. God. And indeed it is certain that v. 10. Eph. i. 2. i. 21. iv. 1. 5. 17. sometimes it hath the nature of an ap v. 8. vi. 1. 4. 10. 21. 23. Phil. i. 2. pellative, as Deut. vi. 4. 1717 1397587170 14. ii. 11. 19. 24. 29. iii. 1. 20. iv. 1. 77x The Lord our God is one Lord ; 2. 10. Col. i. 2. iii. 17. 18. 24. iv. 1. and yet if it be not always and abso 7. 17. 1 Thess. i. 1. iii. 8. iv. 1. 15. lutely a proper name, though all the 17. v. 2. 12. 2 Thess. i. 1. 2. ii. 13. rest were granted to be true, the argu iii. 4. 1 Tim. i. 1. 2 Tim. ii. 24. Tit. ment must be of no validity. Again, i. 4. Philem. 3. 16. 20. Jam. i. 1. he cannot say an article is never af. 2 Pet. iii. 8. 10. 2 John 3. Jude 14. fixed to a proper name, but only that Rev. xiv. 13. xix. 16. I say, they libentius subtrahitur, it is ratheromit are thus so often used), that though ted than affixed: which yet is far from they equal not the number of their a certain or a true rule, especially in contrary acceptions, yet they come the language of the New Testament. so near, as to yield no ground for any For no man can deny Jesus to be the such 'observation, as if the Holy proper name of Christ, given him ac Ghost intended any such article-discording to the law athis circumcision, tinction. Nay, it is most evident that και εκλήθη το όνομα αυτού Ίησούς, Luke the sacred penmen intended no such ii. 21, and yet whosoever shall read distinction, because in the same place the Gospel of St Matthew, will find it speaking of the same person, they ten times ó 'lnrous with an article, usually observe the indifferency of for once 'Incoûs without it. And in adding or omitting the article. As the Acts of the Apostles, written in a Jam. ν. 11. Την υπομονήν Ίωβ ηκούmore Attic style, St Paul is oftener σατε, και το τέλος Κυρίου είδετε, ότι

Psal. cx. 1.

Mal. iii. 1.

human power and dominion ; for as it is often used as the interpretation of the name Jehovah, so is it also for that of Adon or Adonai. The Lord said unto my Lord, saith David, that is, in the original, Jehovah unto Adon; and that Adon is the Word', that Lord is Christ. We know the temple at Jerusalem was the temple of the most high God, and the Lord of that temple in the emphasis of an Hebrew article was Christ, as appeareth by that prophecy?, The Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in.

Now this notation, as it is the interpretation of Adon, 151 signifieth immediately and properly dominion implying a right of possession, and power of disposing. Which doth not only agree with that other notion of Jehovah, but presupposes it, as following and flowing from it. For he who alone hath a being or existence of himself, and thereby is the fountain of all things beside himself, must be acknowledged to have full

τω. .

πολύσπλαγχνός εστιν ο Κύριος και
olktipuwv. 2 Tim. i. 18. Aún aito o
Κίριος ευρείν έλεος παρά Κυρίου εν εκεί-
vnuépą. 1 Cor. vii. 17. "EKAOTOV
ως κέκληκεν ο Κύριος, ούτω περιπατεί-

ver. 22. 'Oyàpěv Kuplu kindels
δούλος, απελεύθερος Κυρίου εστί. See
Rom. xiv. 6–8. Wherefore being
Jehovah is not affirmed absolutely to be
a proper name; being, if it were, yet
it appears that it is not the custom of
the New Testament to useevery proper
name oftener without an article than
with one; being • Kúpos is so often
taken for him whom they acknowledge
God, and Kúpos for him whom they
cannot deny to be the Christ: it fol.
loweth that Christ, acknowledged to
be the Lord, cannot by any virtue
of an article be denied to be the true
Jehovah. We must not then think
to decide this controversy by the
articles, of which the sacred penmen
were not curious, and the transcribers
have been very careless: nor is there
so great uncertainty of the ancient
MSS. in any thing as in the words
and articles of Kύριος and θεός. The

Vulgar edition, Rev. i. 8. hath Néyel
ο Κύριος only, the Complutensis λέγει
Κύριος ο Θεός, Plantine, λέγει ο Κύριος
• Oeós, against the Socinian rule, who
will have an accession by o to Ocós,
and a diminution by from Kúplos.
As Rev, iv. 11. "Atios ei, Kúple, laßeiv
TNU obavo in other MSS. "Agios ei, o
Κύριος και ο θεός ημών ο άγιος, λαβείν
Triv dóžav. 1 Cor. xi. 27. TOT ń plov
Toû Kupiov ávažíwsothers with an ad-
dition, το ποτήριον του Κυρίου αναξίως
To Kurtov. 1 Cor. xiv. 37. the Vulgar
edition, ότι του Κυρίου εισίν εντολαί,
the Complutensis, öti Kuplov. So
where we usually read Xplotós, divers
ancient MSS. have Kúpios. Lastly,
it is observable that even in these
words of the Creed, which we now ex-
pound, Kupios is spoken expressly
of Christ without an article, for so
we read it: Και εις Ιησούν Χριστόν,
τον υιόν αυτού τον μονογενή, Κύριον
ημών. .

i Chaldee paraphrase*.
2 [Prophet, in the third Edition.]

.

3

.הארון

* Bp. Pearson has taken this citation from Martini's Pugio Fidri [p. 705); “notandum autem valde est, quod Targum dicit, Dixit Dominus verbo suo," The Chaldee is there cited as 7799735 It should, however, have been cited 17'70sa,“ in verbo suo."

« FöregåendeFortsätt »