faid to be fulfill'd in the New, which he produces in his Efay, and pretends fo to place in the Old Testament as to make them relate, in their obvious Senfe, to the Purposes, for which they are alledged by the Authors of the New. 群 1. I begin with That of St. MATTHEW, who, on Occafion of our Saviour's being carry'd into Egypt, and being brought back, fays, This was done, (e) that it might be fulfill'd, which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet, faying, "Out of Egypt have I "call'd my Son. Upon which Words Mr. W. (f) very justly obferves, that St. MATTHEW's Citation, "Out of Egypt have I call'd my Son," no where now appears in the Old Teftament as apply'd to the Son of God or MESSIAS, either in Hebrew or Greek; but is Word for Word in HOSEAH, where it is apply'd to the People of Ifrael, whom God, by Moses, had antiently call'd or brought out of Egypt. Which Paffage is therefore fuppofed by all Chriftian Commentators (and perhaps by all Chriftians but himfelf) to be taken from HoSEAH by St. MÁTTHEW, and to be apply'd by him in a fecondary or allegorical Senfe to JESUS's being call'd out of Egypt. Where then does Mr. W. place these Words in the Old Teftament fo as to make St. MATTHEW cite and apply them according to the obvious and literal Sense, which they bear in (e) Matt. 2. 15. (f) Whifton's Elay. p. 88. the the Old Teftament, That is, according to Mr. W, pertinetly? He (g) conjectures, MATTHEW had in his Eye this noble Prophecy of ISAIAH concerning the MESSIAH; which I fhall fet down, according to the prefent Copy of ISAIAH in one Column, and according to Mr. W's Amendment, by the Force of Criticifm, in the fecond. Ifaiah 41. 8, 9. But thou Ifrael art my Whifton. p. 91. Thou Ifrael art my Servant, JACOB, whom Son; I have chofen I have chofen, the Seed thee; the Seed of of ABRAHAM, my Abraham my Friend. Friend. Thou whom I Whom I have taken have taken from the Ends of the Earth; and call'd thee from the chief Men thereof, and faid unto thee, Thou art my Servant, I have chofen and not caft thee away. from the Borders of the Sand, and call'd thee out of Egypt, and faid, Thou art my Son, I have chofen thee, and not cast thee away. Now let this Paffage of ISAIAH, wherein Mr. W. by conjecture puts in the Words out of Egypt, inftead of the more general Words from the chief Men, be fuppofed to be the Paffage referr'd to by St. MATTHEW (which yet I prefume not one Reader will allow ;) how does the literal and obvious Senfe thereof (g) Whifton's Elay. p. 90. in ISAIAH appear to concern JESUS's Coming out of Egypt, any more than the obvious and literal Senfe of the Paffage in HOSE AH? Does not the whole Chapter in ISAIAH as plainly concern the Body of the Jews, fpoken of in the Text under the Term Son, as the Chapter of HOSEAH, where the Jews are spoken of under the fame Term Son? And does not (b) Grotius fo interpret the Place; tho' he conjectures with Mr. W, that the Prophet had Egypt in his View, as (i) others do Chaldea? It is certain, that the Words of ISAIAH are literally and obviously applicable to the past Calling of the Jews out of Egypt. And if fo, it is not reasonable to make them a Prophecy and to relate to the future Calling of JESUS out of Egypt, which feems very remote from the Thoughts of the Prophet, who has no one Circumftance in the whole Chapter to lead an unprejudiced Reader into fuch a Thought. And therefore, if these Words of ISAIAH are referr❜d to by St. MATTHEW, Commentators will be no less obliged to confider them as apply'd by St. MATTHEW in a secondary or allegorical Senfe, than they do the Words of HOSEAH; to which it cannot well be doubted St. MATTHEW does refer; they being the exprefs Words of HoSEAH, and no where elfe to be found in all the Old Testament. 2. The next Quotation, which Mr. W. (k) endeavours to place right in the Old Tefta (b) Grotius in locum. (i) White in locum. p. 297. ment, ment, is contain'd in these Words of St. MATTHEW. (b) Then was fulfill'd That, which was Spoken by JEREMY the Prophet Saying, "and they took the thirty Pieces of Silver, "the Price of him, that was valued, whom they of the Children of Ifrael did value; "and gave them for the Porter's Field, as the "Lord appointed me. Now this Quotation is not in JEREMY the Prophet, but is (m) thought to be in ZACHARY; where, according to its literal and obvious Senfe, it bears not that Meaning, which St. MATTHEW puts upon it; and where, in Mr. W's Opinion, (n) it hardly bears any good Senfe at all. What is it now Mr. W. does on this Occafion ? He believes, (o) that St. MATTHEW cited what was then in his Copy, not out of ZACHARY, but JEREMY; and he believes, that not only this Prediction, but feveral others, now inferted in ZACHARY, really belong to JEREMY. Belief is a notable Proof! But granting this Prophecy, now to be found in ZACHARY, did, in St. MATTHEW's Time, exist in JEREMY; why does he not plant this Quotation in fome particular Place of JEREMY? For till That be done, we cannot judge of the Pertinency of it. To fuppofe it pertinent without giving it a Place in JEREMY, is to beg the Question about the Pertinency of (1) Matt. 27. 9. Zach. 11. 3, 12. (m) Whifton's Eay. p. 94. the (~) Whiston Ib. p. 95 (o) P-94 the Apostles Quotations in their literal Senfe. He fays, the Quotation is (p) good Senfe, as it is cited in St. MATTHEW. But how does That show it to be apply'd according to the literal Senfe it bears in JEREMY? And yet This is all Mr. W. does towards placing this Quotation, or reftoring the true Text of JEREMY, in this Instance. But to fet the Matter of this Quotation in its due Light, and effectually to confute any chimerical Scheme of placing this Quotation in our present Book of JEREMY, or in any other authentick Book of JEREMY; it appears, that it cannot be placed in him, but by fuch a Method as will place any Quotations, or Prophefies, in him. For the Quotation was made from an Apocryphal Book, afcribed to JEREMY, as JEROM (q) affures us, who faw and read that Apocryphal Book. I add here, by the Way, that the Syriac and Perfic Verfions, and those other Copies of St. MATTHEW, which have (r) not the Name of the Prophet, but barely mention the Prophet, feem corrupted on Purpose to make St. MATTHEW not guilty of citing JEREMY falfely; the Tranflators or Tranfcribers, either not knowing whence St. MATTHEW had this Citation, or thinking, that St. MATTHEW should not have cited a Book, forged under JEREMY'S Name, as a Book of the Prophet JEREMY. (P) Whifton's Essay. p. 95⋅ Spicil. Sec. 1. p. 135. of the Meffias. Vol. 2. p. 196, 197. (9) Hieron: apud Grabe (r) Kidder's Demonft. 3. A |