« PreviousContinue »
introductory to the prophecy which commences at verse 5; and therefore when he cites the 1. verse, “ Out of Egypt have I called my son," as being fulfilled in Christ's return from Egypt to Judea, it is evident that he could have cited it only in the way of accommodation. Nevertheless, passages of Scripture thus applied, even in accommodation, had their force with the Jews; and we find that they attempted to alter this very text in Hofea, in the lxx, in order to destroy the force of St. Matthew's application of it to the case of Christ. For in St. Jerom's time the passage had been entirely expunged from many copies of the lxx. and in others it had been changed into εξ Αιγυπτε μετεκαλεσα τα FEZ?& ævis. The remains of this Jewish corruption may still be traced in the Chaldee paraphrase, which though it acknowledges 2 to be the true reading, yet uses the explanation sa 1075 filios eos, When a in the New Testament, it does not immediately follow that the passage so cited is to be considered as actually prophetical; nay not, even when introduced by the phrase wa aangwon : for it appears that this phrase was used with considerable latitude, differently on different occasions. Rosenmüller adopts the distinction of Goflet, that it was used in four different senses: Primum, quum id fit ad literam, quod propheta aliquis prædixit esse futurum; deinde quum
fit, non de quo Scriptura loquitur
in sensu literali, sed id quod præter illud fuit fignificatum : tum quum nec id fit, de
quo Scriptura loquitur, nec aliquid aliud, quod per id fignificatum fuerit, fed quod illi eft fimile; denique quum nec id quod fcriptum est, factum quidem fuerat antea, fed magis magifque fit in pofterum. Duobus modis posterioribus hanc phrafin a Matthæo plerumque ufurpari hoc nullo modo negari poteft ab eo, qui contulerit Cap. ii. 15. 17. 23. Non igitur reperio idoneam causam cur Matthæus in citando Ifaiæ loco vii. 14. aliam notionem' phraseos iva rangwon in animo habuiffe cenfendus eft. Hunc hujus phrafeos usum alia etiam Novi Testamenti loca compro- : bant, e. c. Matth. xv. 7. Luc. iv. 21. Jac. xi. 23. Nam oracula in his locis citata alio tempore impleta fuisse manifestum est ; iterum vero per translationem impleta dicuntur, quum rei alibi narrata fimilis alia contigit. Hunc morem alii etiam scriptores imitati sunt, veluti quum Angelus S. Ephremo: cave, inquit, ne in te impleatur, quod scriptum est, Ephraim ut vitula &c. Ofe. X. 11. (ap. Affemannum, Bibl. Orient. T. 1. 1. 36.)
But though the Psalms may be thus cited by way of accommodation, and therefore their being blluded to in the New Testament does not prove them to be prophetical ; yet
be other circumstances from which the prophetical character may be distinctly evinced, namely, when the Psalm, though
it may be in a certain limited sense, true of David or any other prototype, yet is more distinctly and in a more sublime sense accurately true of Christ. Of this class I reckon Pfalms ii. xvi. and cx. In such cases the double sense of prophecy must be admitted, or that application considered as the true one, which holds without any exception or limitation; on either supposition these three Psalms will be found to be truly prophetical of Christ. But besides these, there are dispersed through various parts of the book of Psalms predictions of the kingdom of Chrift: namely where the Pfalmift speaks of the promise of God, that there should not be wanting a man to fit upon
the throne of David for ever.
It might have been expected that I should have added to the three Psalms above mentioned the xxii. and xl.th also; but however some of the circumstances in these Psalms do most surprisingly indeed accord with the incidents of Christ's life and death, yet there are others which seem unequivocally to Thew, that they cannot be considered as prophecies of him. Thus in Pfalm xxii. the speaker says, that he cries night and day unto God for relief, but that he hears him not : whereas on the contrary Christ himfelf, in John xi. 41. says,
« Father I thank thee - that thou hast heard me, and I knew that thou “ hearest me always.” 2. He prays fervently to be delivered from his enemies, “ be not thou far from me O Lord, O my strength make haste to help “me; deliver my soul from the sword, my life “ from the power of the dog ; save me from the “ lion's mouth.” “On the contrary Christ says, Oh ! “ my father, if be possible let this cup pass from
me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt,” “ Matt. xxvi. 39. And from John xii.27. it is evident, “ that he did not pray for the death that awaited « him. Now is
my foul troubled, says he, and “ what shall I say? Father, fave me from this hour : 6 but for this cause came I unto this hour.” 3. The speaker is confident of being delivered from his present distress by the assistance of God; whereas Christ on the contrary knew well the certainty of his death.
All these circumstances so strong in themselves, and so diametrically opposite to the case of Christ, induce me to think, that this Psalm cannot be confidered as a prophecy of him.
It seems extraordinary that Le Clerc should admit, that the 3d verse is not applicable to Christ, and yet consider the whole Psalm as prophetical of him. And at verfe 20, he observes, “ This and great part
of what follows is applicable only to David.” Now fince the same person continues the speaker from one end of the Psalm to the other, it surely follows, that either all must be applicable to him or none.
Neither can the xl. Psalm in my opinion be considered as a prophecy of Christ, however some passages may be accommodated to him. For 1. The speaker says, that his enemies may be made desolate as a reward for their shame, whereas Christ, on the contrary, prays for his enemies : “ Father for“ give them, they know not what they do.”— 2. He confesses that he is guilty of iniquities more numerous than the hairs of his head. On which latter passage Le Clerc remarks, hæc non nisi coactè de Christo dici queant, nec totus Pfalmus ad illum propterea, ut multi faciunt, vi detorquendus eft.
From the difficulties which thus appear to attend an enquiry into the prophetical Psalms, it is clear, that the most probable means of ascertaining the true meaning, is to endeavour to discover the primitive and original sense, without mixing or confounding it with that which is secondary and figurative. More especially as it is vain to urge the secondary sense in controversy with infidels, as Primate Newcome and Dr. Benson have observed. This plan has been already pursued by the learned Mr. Z. Mudge, in his Essay towards a new Version of the Psalıns, printed in 1744. His observations are numerous and valuable, and his conjectures almost always ingenious ; many of which have been fince confirmed by the authority of manuscripts,