CHAP. XIX.

Further objections of the rabbi answered.

THE next objection raised by the Jew is to St. Paul's alleging those words of the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee, to prove that Jesus is the Son of God, Acts xiii. 33. "For David," says he, "by the inspiration of the

66

Holy Ghost, spake that whole Psalm of himself. "about the beginning of his reign, when he heard "that the nations had gathered themselves together

against him; as it is written, 2 Sam. v. But when "the Philistines heard that they had anointed Da"vid king over Israel, all the Philistines came up "to seek Davida" As he brings no argument to make good this assertion that David spake this Psalm of himself, so it is very little he says in answer to those things which shew that it was spoken, not of David, but of the Messiah. Nor does he so much as take notice of the concluding expression in the Psalm, which fully proves that it belongs to the Messiah, and to him only, that is, Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. This clearly evinces that the person spoken of must be God. For how often are we in the sacred writings, and particularly in the Book of Psalms, cautioned against putting our trust in man, even the greatest of men! Psalm cxlvi. 3. Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. Nay a curse is denounced by the prophet Jeremy on those

a Chiz. Em. p. 2. cap. 68.

↳ See Psalm lxii. 8, 9. and cxviii. 8, 9. Is. ii. 22.

d

who do so, Jer. xvii. 5. Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. On the other hand, we are constantly directed to make God alone our refuge and trust, and the man who does so is pronounced blessed, Jer. xvii. 7. Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, whose hope the Lord is. And to the same purpose in many places of the Psalms and Proverbs e. It is also said in the sixth verse of the second Psalm, I have anointed my king upon my holy hill of Zion. This passage is taken notice of by the rabbi, and all he says in answer to it is, that "Zion was the royal city, and is also "called the city of David;" but never attempts to prove that David was inaugurated there. David, though anointed king three times, was not once anointed upon Zion; nor indeed was the fortress of Zion as yet subdued by him, nor under his dominion, even when anointed the last time at Hebron. And how very little do agree to David those words of the seventh verse, Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. The conquests which David made upon the Philistines, the Moabites, the Edomites, the Ammonites, and other neighbouring nations taken notice of by the rabbi, can never surely be thought to come up to these expressions. Besides, the ancient Hebrew doctors themselves, such as Aben Ezra, Raschi, Kimchi, interpret this Psalm of the King Messiah,

Ps. iv. 5. 8. xviii. 30, 31, 32. xxxvii. 3. 5. 39. 40. lxii. 2. 5— 8. and cxv. 9, 10, 11.

d Ps. xxxiv. 8. xl. 4. cxxv. 1. and cxlvi. 5.

e Prov. xvi. 20.

and acknowledge that the sense is much more clear and plain when applied to the Messiah, than when applied to David.

Another objection is taken from Acts xiii. 35, 36, 37. where St. Paul cites those words of Psalm xvi. Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption; and to prove that this must belong to Christ, adds, that David after death did in his body see corruption; but Jesus, whom God raised from the dead, saw no corruption. In opposition to this the rabbi alleges, that the Hebrew word schachath, there used by the Psalmist, "does not signify corruption in the sense in which St. Paul "takes it." But, first of all, this Hebrew word was so rendered by the Jews themselves long before St. Paul's time. For the Greek word, from which St. Paul argues, is the very word by which the LXX translated it. And so it was afterwards; rabbi Kimchi quotes from Midrash, or an interpretation of the Psalms, this sentence: "The Psalmist

66

here teaches, that after death the worms should "not destroy him h;" which is exactly the same interpretation as is put on the words by St. Paul. 2dly, It is sufficiently evident from the root, whence the word proceeds, that this is its true and proper signification. The root signifies to destroy, to corrupt, and is used concerning the girdle of the prophet Jeremy, to express to us that it was marred or putrefied. And, 3dly, the word itself is to be taken

f Vid. Surenhusii Biß. Karaλ. p. 406. 592.

8 Chiz. Em. p. 2. cap. 69.

Vid. Sinops. Crit. in loc. et Bithneri Lyra Proph.

in this sense in other parts of holy writ, particularly Job ix. 31 k. Ps. lv. ult1.

The next objection is taken from the beginning of Acts xv. But as this relates to the Christian religion in general, which he falsely accuses of being more difficult to be observed than the law of Moses, and contains nothing in particular against the Acts of the Apostles m, I shall pass it by. There is another taken from Acts xv. 17. wherein he charges the apostle James "with altering the words of the "prophet Amos in order to prove his religion "." But first of all the apostle James quotes those words as they were translated by the Jews themselves long before his time: for it is the translation of the

We have translated it, Thou shalt plunge me in a ditch; but the true meaning is, Thou shalt cause my body so to corrupt and putrefy, that my own clothes shall abhor me.

1 In our translation, Shalt bring them down into the pit of destruction. The pit of the pit, according to the rabbi's interpretation of this word, would be a strange expression. The truth is, it is the pit of corruption, the pit in which their bodies shall decay, corrupt, and putrefy.

m He represents these words of St. Peter, Wherefore do you put a yoke upon the disciples, which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear? But we believe, that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, as contradicting the advice given by our Saviour to the rich man, Matt. xix. which was to keep the commandments: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother, and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. "In these words," says the rabbi, "Jesus teaches, that no man can obtain salvation without keeping the commands of the Mosaic law." Chiz. Em. p. 2. c. 70. To this I shall have occasion to speak hereafter.

66

n Chiz. Em. p. 2. c. 71.

LXX which is here used. And, 2dly, it is also evident that, take the words either according to the letter of the Hebrew text, or according to the LXX, they fully prove what they are produced for by St. James, that is, the intention of the Almighty to extend his favour to other nations as well as the Jews. And, 3dly, the Talmudic P and other Jewish writers interpret this passage of the prophet Amos, of the kingdom of the Messiah. And, 4thly, it is very clear that rabbi Isaac, by his interpretation, oversets the plain, natural, grammatical sense of the words. For what is in the Hebrew spoken of the heathen nations, he confines to the Jewish. What is in the Hebrew, And all the nations that are called by my name, he renders thus; "And the "Israelites shall possess all nations, because they, "that is the Israelites, are called by my name."

In the next chapter he observes, that Christians are not obedient to the apostolic decree, which forbids the eating of things strangled, and of bloods. And in the chapter following accuses the chastity of Timothy's mother, because, being a Jewess, she married an uncircumcised Greek. But these things

• It is sufficiently plain that the LXX read the Hebrew something differently from what it is in our present copies. Vid. Gusset. Ver. Sal. p. 2. p. 425. and Surenhus. B.B. Kat. p. 433. What St. James did is uncertain, because St. Luke, in relating, might make use of the LXX version. Vid. Lightfoot, vol. 2. p. 694. and p. 810, fin.

P Sanhed. fol. 69, 2. cited by Lightf. vol. 2. p. 694, pr.

9 Aberbinel, cited by our most learned bishop Chandler in his Defence of Christianity, p. 174, who there says, that the Jews are pretty unanimous in saying this is a prophecy of the Messias. Vecol hagoiim asher nikra shemi aleihem.

s Chiz. Em. p. 2. c. 72.

t Ibid. c. 73.