Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

Ahaz, the king of Judah, and all his people, are greatly alarmed. (ver. 2.) Then the Lord desires Isaiah the prophet, to go forth and meet Ahaz, and to take with him his own child, Shearjashub, (ver. 3,) and to say, "take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be faint-hearted," &c. (ver. 4.) In verse 14, it is written, "Therefore," (referring to Ahaz's perfect submission to the will of the Lord, as related in verse xii.,) "the Lord himself shall give you a sign," (to point out to Ahaz the utter impossibility of this confederacy succeeding in their attempt to destroy the house of David.) "Behold a virgin of this very house of David, shall bring forth Immanuel," which could not be the case if they were to succeed. (ver. 14.) And then the prophet, in verse 16, adds, respecting these two kings, (Rezin and Pekah,) that, "before this, (in the original,) child," (not alluding to the one he mentioned, in ver. 14,) would be born of a virgin; that is, his own child "Shearjashub," which he had then in his arms, (ver. 3,) "before this child," (Shearjashub,) "shall know how to refuse the evil, and choose the good," (that is, before it comes to the years of discretion,) "the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings." This was literally accomplished in three or four years, for Hosea conspired and slew Pekah, king of Israel, (2 Kings, xv. 30,) and shortly before that, the king of Assyria took Damascus, and slew Rezin. (2 Kings, xvi. 9.)

What else did the prophet on this occasion tell Ahaz? Did he say these kings should not vex him? No. Did he say these kings should not conquer him? No. Did he say these kings should not succeed against him? No. He merely said "the purpose or object of these two kings shall not come to pass. (ver. 7.) What then was their object or purpose? "To go up against Judah-to

vex it-to make a breach therein-in order to set a king in the midst of it—even the son of Tabeal.” Isaiah, vii. 6. Now, did their purpose stand, did it come to pass? No. Was any revolution effected? No. Was the royal house of David dethroned and destroyed? No. Was Tabeal ever made king of Judah? No. The prophecy, in all its parts, was literally and critically fulfilled. These kings, then, did fail in their attempt; they did not destroy the house of David; for Ahaz slept with his fathers; and Hezekiah his son, of the house of David, reigned in his stead! Thus, then, it is evident the house of David could never fail till a virgin would conceive and bear a son, whose name would be Immanuel, (Isaiah, vii. 14,) NOR DID IT! But when once that occurred, the kingdom and house of David became extinct! Then either the prophecy has not been as yet fulfilled, and the house of David stands-or the prophecy has been fulfilled, and the house of David does not stand! Which is the case? Why, the house of David has long since been extinct— therefore the prophecy has been fulfilled-therefore Jesus Christ, of Nazareth, was the Messiah of God; and therefore, Christianity is incontrovertibly true. See Prophecy.

ISRAEL, one of Jacob's names; also the name of the ten tribes; and of all Jacob's descendants, &c. In Gen. xxxiv. 7, it is Jacob, and not the land of Israel, that is alluded to; and the original word, translated in that verse, "in" signifies also "against." It is so rendered in Numb. xxi. 7.

It is written in Gen. xlviii. 8, that "Israel beheld Joseph's sons;" but in verse 10, it is said, that " his eyes were dim, so that he could not see." Had these sentences occurred in different parts of the Bible; or had they been

written by different persons, how would the infidel triumph at the discovery of this palpable contradiction! But it so happens, that they both occur in the very same page of the Bible; were written by one and the same person; and at one and the same time; being separated from each other by only thirty-five words! However, had these statements been written by different persons, there is really no contradiction whatsoever between them. For the first passage does not imply, that he could not see at all; but only that he could not plainly and distinctly see the objects which were before him. 'fore, although he beheld Ephraim and Manasseh, yet he could not distinguish them, until they were brought near to him.

[ocr errors]

There

JACOB'S FAMILY. It is stated in Acts, vii. 14, that Jacob's family, when he went down into Egypt, were three score and fifteen souls. (75.) Whereas Moses, in Gen. xlvi. 27, states the family to have been only three score and ten souls. (70.) This apparent contradiction has been most satisfactorily reconciled by Dr. Hales, in the following way:

"Moses states that all the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which issued from his loins, (in which of course his son's wives are not included,) were sixty-six souls. Gen. xlvi. 26. Thus:

Jacob's children, eleven sons and one daughter,
Reuben's sons,

Simeon's sons,

Levi's sons,

Judah's three sons and two grandsons,
Issachar's
's sons,

Zebulun's sons,

Gad's sons,

12

4

6

3

5437

Asher's four sons, and one daughter, and two

[blocks in formation]

If to these we add the wives of Jacob's sons, which were,

The exact number as stated in the Acts, is the

result, viz:

75

In this calculation it must be observed, that nine only of the twelve wives of Jacob's sons, are mentioned; the reason is, two of them were dead; Judah's and Simeon's (Gen. xxxviii. 12; xlvi. 19); and Joseph's wife was already in Egypt.

Thus we find, that the statements in the Old and New Testaments critically correspond! Joseph sent for his father Jacob, and all his kindred, amounting to seventyfive souls. The speaker in the Acts, alluded to all Jacob's relations, not only by blood, but also by marriage; hence called them kindred. Whereas Moses, in Gen. xlvi. 26, spoke of Jacob's relations by blood only; hence used the emphatic language," which came out of his (Jacob's) loins, BESIDES JACOB'S SON'S WIVES!"

JACOB's dialogue, which is related in Gen. xxix. 1. 8, as having taken place on an occasion when there was no person present, except Jacob and his flocks, as if his flocks were speaking to him. But the difficulty is solved by the fact, that the Hebrew word, which signifies flocks, was mistaken by some transcriber, in verses 2 and 8, for haroim, which signifies shepherds, and ought to have been translated "shepherds," not "flocks," in these verses.

An

Arabic version in Bishop Walton's Polyglott; the Samaritan text of the Pentateuch, and the Greek version, all prove the truth of this explanation.

JACOB and ESAU. See Hate.

JAIRUS. See Sleep.

JAMES, the brother of John, was put to death by Herod, the grandson of Herod the Great. (Acts, xii. 1. 3.) This is another circumstance fully corroborated by that honest Jewish historian, Josephus, in a passage, the genuineness of which, no one has ever questioned. (See Ant. lib. xx. chap. ix. sec 1.) It runs thus: "Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of Judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, (or some of his companions.) And when he had formed an accusation against them, as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned; but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the King, (Agrippa,) desiring him to send to Ananus, that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done, was not to be justified."

JEALOUSY. See, Vengeance.

JEHOSHAPHAT, the king of Juhah, is seduced by Ahab the king of Israel, to make war against Syria. (1 Kings, xxii.) The latter consults his (not God's) prophets, who, like all sycophants and dependants about

« FöregåendeFortsätt »