Page images

would naturally have used terms descriptive of the greatest splendour of the tribe of Judah, the reign of David, or, had he lived to see it, that of Solomon. (4.) The clause,—“to him shall be the homage (or expectation of nations," -- is left without any corresponding circumstance whatever.

So much space would not have been given to this insipid topic, but from the wish to exhibit a specimen of that noxious pseudocriticism whose characters are vaunting arrogance and manifest irreligion, employing a prodigious machinery of perverted learning to compress all in the scriptures that is most solemn and important, into insignificance and nullity.

Note [B] p. 179.

Reading abw with the Samaritan Pentateuch and Version, many Hebrew MSS. and all the most valuable and ancient versions.-" The Messiah, whose is the kingdom." Targum of Onkelos. “ The King Messiah, whose is the kingdom." Jerusalem Targum. “ He whose it is.” Syr. and Arab. “ He for whom it is reserved.” Aquila and Symmachus.

“ The things reserved for him." Septuagint. The Bereshith Rabba (a Rab

. binical collection of explications of Genesis, attributed to the fifth century) repeatedly affirms this passage to belong to the Messiah: and the Zohar, a more ancient work, the substance of which is attributed on good grounds to the second century, or rather to the first, (as, like Xenophon's Memorabilia of Socrates, it is principally a recital of the expositions and doctrines of Rabbi Simeon, the son of Jochai, who was contemporary with the apostles), says, on Gen. xlvii. 31. “He (Jacob) worshipped, , because the Messiah was to come at the end of the days, and the Shechinah was to dwell with them.” Ap. Schættgenii Hor. Hebr. et Talm. tom. ii. 450.

The learned Dr. William Hales, late Prof. of Orient. Lang. in Trin. Coll. Dublin, proposes to read abw, on the authority of the Vulgate; the one sent, the Apostle, John xviii. 3. Heb. iii. 1, Certainly the conjecture is not violent, of an early and undesigned change of n into 17, but the weight of authority is against it. Analysis of Chronol. vol. ii. p. 173.





Deut. xviii. 18, 19. “ A prophet will I raise up unto them, from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put my “words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I “shall command him: and it shall be, that the man who will not “ hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I “ will require of him" (for his disobedience.]

THOSE who have interpreted this divine promise, as referring to the succession of the inspired prophets in Israel and Judah, or to any one among them, must have overlooked the principal circumstance in the description, the likeness to Moses. Not one of the Jewish prophets was a LEGISLATOR, not even David, though a king as well as a prophet; for the kingly office in Judea was, by divine constitution, purely executive. The law which Jehovah had given allowed of neither addition nor diminution. Jesus of Nazareth is the only Jewish prophet who has been, like Moses, the Founder of a new law. It was predicted of the Messiah that, under his reign, the Levitical observances should cease; and, of course, the whole authority of that law would then be abolished.*

Isa. Ixvi. 18, 21. Jer. iii. 16, 17. xxxi. 31–34.

But those with whom apostolic authority is conclusive, can have no doubt of the application of

this passage. *


The conclusions to be obviously drawn from it are, that the Messiah should be a man, a descendant of Israel, a prophet of the highest order, and a divinely authorized lawgiver.

* Acts iji. 22.



2 Sam. vii. 18, 19. What am I, O Lord Jehovah, and “ what my house, that thou hast brought me to this point [of ex

altation)! And little [is] even this in thine eyes, O Lord Je“ hovah: thou hast even spoken, with respect to the house of thy

servant, unto a vast extent! And this [is] the law *of the Adam, “ O Lord Jehovah !". -The parallel recital in 1 Chron. xvii. 16, 17, reads the last clause; “ -Thou hast regarded me ac“cording to the order* of the Adam from above, [or, the pre-emi

nent,] O Jehovah God!”

On the interpretation of this important passage, and its application to the Messiah, the reader will be gratified in seeing the sentiments of the laborious and learned Dr. Kennicott. I have no fear of being blamed for inserting a citation of such length, considering its interesting nature, and the scarcity of the books from which it is taken.

The inferences to be drawn from this passage are, that the Messiah would, at a period remotely future, descend from David, and that he would

[blocks in formation]

sustain a relation to the human race analogous to that of the first man. Perhaps it must remain a matter of doubt, whether aspon is to be rendered, by taking the p as a preposition, which will effect the sense “ from on high;” or as a preformant, then signifying

“the person of exaltation, or eminence. The latter is supported by the majority of authorities: but the former has the recommendation of coinciding with the character of the Messiah repeatedly laid down in the New Testament, that he should be “from above, and above all, the second man, the Lord from heaven."*

very ex

Joh. iii. 31. viii. 23. 1 Cor. xv. 45, 47. The pression occurs in the Zohar. See the note on Gen. xlix. 10. In it the Messiah is called bugs on the Adam on high, and is said to have dominion over all things, as the first man, the Adam below (nnnn ) had by divine appointment over the inferior creation of this world. Zohar in Gen. ap. Schættg. Hor. Hebr. et Talm. tom. ii. 271.

« PreviousContinue »