But fince that Time, the learned SURENHUSIUS, Profeffor of the Hebrew Tongue in the illuftrious School of Amfterdam, has made an ample Discovery to the World of the Rules, by which the Apoftles cited the Old Teftament, and argued from thence, in a (i) Treatife; wherein the whole Mystery of the Apoftles applying Scripture in a fecondary or typical, or myftical, or allegorical Sense seems unfolded. I fhall therefore state this Matter from SURENHUSIUS; who himself gives the Subftance as well as the Occafion of his Work in his Preface.

He fays, (k) "That when he confider'd "the various Opinions of the Learned about "the Paffages of the Old Testament quoted " in the New, he was fill'd with Grief, not "knowing where to fet his Foot, and being "much concern'd that what had been done "with good Succefs upon profane Authors, "could not be fo happily perform'd upon the "facred."

He tells us, "That having had frequent "Occafions to converfe with the Jews, (on "Account of his Application to Hebrew Literature from his Youth,) who infolently. "reflected on the New Testament; affirming "it to be plainly corrupted, because it seldom

(i) Tractatus in quo fecundum Veterum Theologorum Hebræ orum formulas allegandi, & modus interpretandi, conciliantur loca ex V. in Nov. Teft. allegata. Amftel. 1713. p. 712.

(k) For this Extract out of SURENHUSIUS, I am for the most Part obliged to the learned and ingenious Monf. De la Roche; from whofe Memoirs of Literature I have, in great Meafure, taken it.

or

er

or never agreed with the Old Testament, "fome of whom were fo confident in this

Opinion as to fay they would profess the "Chriftian Religion, if any one could re"concile the New Teftament with the Old; "he was the more grieved, because he knew

not how to apply a Remedy to this Evil. "But the Matter being of great Importance, "he difcourfed with feveral learned Men "about it, and read the Books of others, being perfuaded, that the Authors of the "Books of the New Teftament had writ nothing, but what was fuited to the Time, "wherein they lived, and that CHRIST and his Apoftles had conftantly follow'd the "Method of their Ancestors. After he had long revolved this Hypothefis in his Mind, at laft he met with a Rabbin well skill'd "in the Talmud, the Cabbala, and the allegorical Books of the Jews. That Rabbin "had once embraced the Chriftian Religion,

re

but was again relapfed to Judaism, on "Account of the Idolatry of the Papists, yet "not perfectly disbelieving the Integrity of "the New Teftament. Mr. SURENHUSIUS "ask'd him, what he thought of the Paffages "of the Old Teftament, quoted in the New, "whether they were rightly quoted or not? " and whether the Jews had any juft Reason

to cavil at them? And at the fame Time "he proposed to him two or three Paffages, "which had very much exercised the most "learned Chriftian Commentators. The Rab"bin having admirably explain'd thofe Paffages, E

to

"to the great Surprise of our Author, and "confirm'd his Explications by feveral Places "of the (1) Talmud, and by the Writings "of the Jewish Commentators and allegorical "Writers; Mr. SURENHUSIus ask'd him, "what would be the beft Method to write a "Treatife, in Order to vindicate the Paffages of the Old Teftament, which have been quoted in the New? The Rabbin answer'd, "that he thought the best Way of fucceeding " in such an Undertaking would be to perufe a great Part of the Talmud, and the allegorical and literal Commentaries of the "most ancient Jewish Writers; to observe "their feveral Ways of quoting and inter

preting Scripture; and to collect as many "Materials of that Kind, as would be fuf"ficient for that Purpose. Mr. S. took the "Hint immediately; he read feveral Parts of "the Talmud; he perufed the Jewish Books "above-mention'd, and obferved every Thing, "that might be fubfervient to his Defign. "And having made a large Collection of "those Materials, he put all his Thefes into "Order, and digefted them into four Books. The first whereof treats of the Forms of quoting, illuftrating, and reconciling the Scriptures, in 59 Thefes; the fecond treats of the Manner of quoting, in 20 Theses; the "third treats of the Manner of interpreting, "in 25 Thefes; and the fourth treats of the "Manner of expounding and reconciling the

(1) See Scaligerana. p. 265.

"Genealogies,

"Genealogies, in 35 Thefes." Then he proceeds in a fifth Book to explain and justify all the Quotations made from the Old Teftament in the New, by his foregoing Thefes.

As to the Forms of quoting, which is the Subject of his first Book, he fays, "that in "Ŏrder to vindicate and reconcile any Paf"fage of the Old Teftament quoted in the "New, one muft in the first place observe, "what Form of quoting the Apostles made "Ufe of; because from thence one may im

mediately know, why they alledge the following Words in a certain Manner, rather "than in another, and why they depart more << or less from the Hebrew Text. Thus a different Senfe is implied in each of the following Forms of quoting ufed by the "facred Writers of the New Teftament; "it has been faid; it is written; that it might be fulfill'd, which was spoken; the Scripture fays; fee what is faid; the Scripture forefeeing; is it not written; wherefore he fays; have you never read; "what fays the Scripture; as he spoke ; &c. Befides, he fays, it ought to be confider'd, why in those Quotations God is introduced "under the Name of Lord, or God, or Holy Ghost, and fometimes the Writer himself,

or the Scripture; and likewife, why the "Perfons or Things, in Question, are intro"duced fpeaking. Laftly, it ought to be

obferved, when and why a Paffage of the "Old Teftament is alledged in the New "without any previous Form of quoting; " and

E 2

" and why fome Traditions, and History "almost forgotten, are fometimes occafionally "brought in, as if they made a Part of

Scripture?" In the fecond Book, which treats of the Manner of quoting, he fhows, "that the Books of the Old Teftament have "been difpofed in a different Order at different

Times, and have had different Names, "which is the Reason, why a Writer or a "Book is fometimes confounded with another in the New Teftament." Befides, he produces feveral Reasons, why the facred Writers of the New Teftament might, and even were obliged to alledge the Paffages of "the Old Teftament otherwise than they are

exprefs'd in the Original, viz. because the "ancient Hebrew Doctors affirm'd, that in "the Time of the MESSIAS fome obfcure and "difficult Paffages of Scripture should be

clear'd, and the Impropriety of Words mended, the Intricacy of the Stile removed, "Words difpofed in a better Order, and a myftical Sense drawn out of the literal, that "the Vail being taken away, Truth might plainly appear to every Body." The Author infers from thence, "that the Jews cannot reasonably find Fault with the Apostles for putting a spiritual Senfe upon feveral Paffages of the Old Testament." In the next Place he fhows, "that the Jewish Doctors "take a prodigious Liberty in quoting the Scripture, and gives us feveral Instances of

"

it. The laft is very remarkable, and made Mr. SUREN HUSIUS very angry

with the

feeming

1