« ForrigeFortsæt »
reproaches of Zews and Infidels on that ac count, who have never been able to withstand the success of that bypothesis ; but should rather apprehend and fear their insults and reproaches upon himself, who proceeds with them on the supposition of a loft oly Testament... wat is bis ici,
. . IV
19: That Mr. WHISTON is not able to restore one
prophetical quotation, made out of the old in the New Testament, so as to make that literally apph'd which now seems allegot
rically apply'de 17è 15 line 117 D UT to confute Mr.W's hypothesis ef,
D fectually, I observe, that he is not able either by the means of various readings drawn from the fources beforemention d, on by critical emendations, or by taking out passages, or by placing right fuppos’d dislos cated passages, or by all these together, fo to restore any citations of prophesies, made from the Old Testament and faid to be fulfill'd in the New, as to make them obyiously, and literally, and agreeably to the context where he places them, relate to the purposes, for which they are cited by the authors of the New Testament. And if he is not, then is his Hypothefis-a-vain Hypothesis, and serves no purpose whatsoever ;
unlefs he thinks it fufficient to fuppose, from the mere authority of the New Testament. the citations pertinent in his sense, without being able to show, that it is poslible for any one of them to be fo; and then he need not have wrote his Elay to restore the true text. of the Old Te nt. ,,S
I I fhall go thro? those few citations of pro, phesies made from the Old Testament, and faid to be fulfill’d in the New, which he produces in his Essay, and pretends fo to place in the Old Testament as to make them relate, in their obvious sense, to the purposes for, which they are alledg’d by the authors of the New.
1. I begin with that of Șt. MATTHEW, who on occasion of our Saviour's being car ry'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, saying, Out of Egypt have I " call'd my Son."
1.png Upon which words Mr.W. (f) very juftly observes, that St. MATTHEW's citation, çó Out of Egypt have I call’d my Son,” no where now appears in the Old Testament as appl'd to the Son of God or Messias, either in Hebrew or Greek; but is word for word
in Hosta, where it is apply'd to the people of Israel, whom God, by Moses, bad antiently cald or brought out of Egypt. Which pał sage is therefore fuppos'd by all christian com mentators (and perhaps by all christians but himself) to be taken from HOSEA by St. MATTHEW, and to be apply'd by him in a fecondary or allegorical* fenfe to Jesus's being call'd- out of Egypt. "... - Where then does Mr. W. place these words in the Old Testament so as to make St. MATTHEW cite and apply them according to the obvious and literal fense, which they be arin the Old Testament, that is, according to Mr. W. pertinently?
He (5) conjecturés, MATTHEW bad in bis. eye this moble prophery of ISAIAH CONcerning the MESSIAH; which I shall fet down, according to the present copy of IsalAs in one column, and according to Mr. W's. amendment, by the force of criticism, in the other.
(8) Whiston's Ejay, p. 90.
Isaiah 41. 8, 9. 1 Whiston, p.91.
But thou Ifrael art Thou Israel art my 1929 fervant, JACOB, Son : I have chosen obim I have chosen thee : the feed of the foed of ABRAHAM, Abraham my friend. may friend. Thou whom whom I have taken I have taken from the from the borders of ends of the earth, and the land, and called called thee from the thee out of Egypt, chief men there f, and and said, Thou art faid unto thee, Thou my Son, I have cho. art my fervant, I have fen thee, and not caft cholen and not caft thee thee way. ; , away.
Now let this passage of ISAIA H, wherein Mr. W. by conjecture puts in the words out of Egipt, instead of the more general words from the chief men, be supposid to be the palaze referr'd to by St. MATTHEW (which yet I presume not one reader will allow) how does the literal and obvious fenfe thereof in Isa l'ai appear to concern Jesus's com ing out of Egypt, any 'more than the obvious and literal fenfe of the passage in HoSEA? Does not the whole chapter in Isaia Ah as plainly concern the body of the Jews, fpoken of in the text under the term Son, as the chapter of Hose 4, where the Jews are spoken of under the fame term Son? And
does not (b) Grotius so interpret the place; tho he conje&tures with Mr. W. that the prophet had Egypt in his view, as (2) others do Chaldea?
- It is certain, that the words of Isaiah aro literally and obviously applicable to the pat calling of the Jews out of Egypt. And if fo, it is not reasonable to make them a prophefy, and to relate to the future calling of Jesus out of Egypt, which seems very remote from the thoughts of the prophet, who has 110 one circumstance in the whole chapter to lead an unprejudic'd reader into fuch à thought. And therefore, if these words of Isaiah are referr'd to by St. MATTHEW, commentators will be no less oblig'd to consider them as apply'd by St. MATTHEW in a fecondary or allegorical fenfe, than they do the words of HOSEAH; to which it cannot well be doubted St. MATTHEW: does refer, they being the express words of HOSEAH, and no where else to be found in all the Old Testamenti in qu'", into ' Ii. -2. The next quotation, which Mr. W. (k) endeavours to place right in the Old Testament is contain'd in thefe words of St. MATTHEW. (1). Then was fulfill'd that which - } li ri mong
(b) Grotius in locum.' 'E i1.
i White in locum, p. 29793? ", . pk) Whison's Ejay, P. 93. 2 (0) Matt. 27.9.