VE.R f. Epl¡Ìlet0 the HEB REWS. great name in this place,feems to be weak and not unlike unto that which the Here- ticks make ufe of in the like cafes. And therefore anfwers, that the Apoffle argues negativey, not only from theScripture, but from Tradition alto. But this Anfwer is farmore weak than the Argument is pretended tobe. The Apoffle deals exprefly in all this Chapter from the Tejtimony ofScripture ; and to that alone do his words re- late ; and therein doth he iffue the whole Controverfie he had in hand; knowing that the Jews had many corrupt Traditions exprefly contrary to what heundertook to prove; particularly,that the LawofMofes was Eternally Obligatory, againfi which he direâly contendsin the whole Epiffle. An Argument then takennegatively from the Authority of the Scripture in matters ofFaith, or what relates to the Worfhip ofGod, is valid and effeEtual , and here canficrated for ever to the ufe of the Church by the Apoftie. 7birdly,That the Apoffle either indeed grants or elfe for. Argumentsfake condefcendr unto the Apprehenfonof the Hebrews, that there is a dillinIion of degrees and pre- beminence amongft theAngels themfelves. Toconfirmtherefore his general Allertion ofthe Dignityand Preheminence of Chriltabove them all, he provokes them to infiance in any oneof them, whicheither indeed,or in their Apprehenfion, was promoted above others , to whom fuch Words as thefe were ever 'poker:. To which of the Angels laid ' he; his Affertion refpelès not only the community ofthem, but any, or all of the chief, or Princes among them. There are O+]tvxltt arlip, Dan. to. 13. ChiefPrinces among the Angels. And ofthem Michael, the Prince of the People, of God, is laid to be Tlti, One; that is not in Order; but the chief m Dignity, their Head and Leader. Now faith the Apoffle , towhichol'ány of thefe, or of the reft of them, were thefe words fpoken ? Proceed we now to theTeflimony its fell produced. Three things are required to make it pertinent unto his Purpofe, and ufeful unto the End for which he makes mention of it. Firft, That Ile ofwhom he fpeaks was peculiarly intended therein. Secondly, That there be in it an Afgnationof a Name unto him made byGod him. felf, which thereon hemight claim as hispeculiar Inheritance. Thirdly, That this Name either abfolutely, or in its peculiarmannerof Appropriation unto him, ismore excellent than any that was ever given untoAngels, as a fign of their Dignity. Authority, and Excellency. And there things for the clearing of the Apofiles Argument mull particularly beinlifiedon. Firft, The words produced dopeculiarly belong unto him to whom they are apply- ed. That is, it is the Mefab who is prophefiedof in the frondPfalm from whence they are taken. This with all Chriftians is put beyond difpute, by the Application of it in feveral places unto him : asAllis 4. 25, 26, 27. Aos 13.33. Heb. 5.5. It is cer- tain alto, that the Jews alwayes elteemed this Pfalm to relate unto the Me fiah,' they do fo to thisday. Hence the Targum on the Pfalm exprefly applyes it unto him ; thus rendring thefewords ; 0beloved, as a Son to bis Farber, thou are pure to me as in the day wherein Icreated thee. Soare the words perverted bytheTargumijf ; not know, ing what Cede ioafcribe unto them, which is frequent with him. But it is mani- felt that theconfiant Opinion of theantient Jews,was that this Pfalm principally in- tended theMeffiab ; nor didany of themof old diffent. Some of their latterMaters areotherwife minded; but therein difcovertheirobitinacy and iniquity. ThusRabbi Solomon Jarchi in his Comment on this Pfalm, in the VenetianEdition of the great Maferetical Bibles, affirms, that what ever is lung in this Pfalm, our Wert interpreted of Mph the King ;'but faith he, according unto thefound of the werdr,andfor the confutation ofthe Hereticks (that is,Chriltians) it is convenient that we expound it ofDavid. So wickedly corrupt and partial are they now in their Inter- pretations of theScripture. But thefe words are left out in the Bali/ Editionof the fame Notes andComments, by the fraud itmay be oftheJewsemployed in that work, fo to hide the difhonelly ofone of their great Mailers. But the confeflionof the Judge- ment of their Fathers or Predecefrs in this matter, is thereinalfo extant. AndAben Ezra though he would apply it unto David, yet fpeaks doubtfullywhether it may not better be afcribed unto theMefah. But this was not enoughfor the Apostle, that thofe with whom he dealt acknow ledged thefe words to be fpokenconcerning the Mefah, unlçfs they were fo really ; Fff a that
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=