VB R. I;. E:pi/lle to the H fx BREWS. It remainsthen that this Pfalmwas written concerning the Mzfrah and him alone, for noother fubje t ofit can be afligned. And this ufe in our pottage we may make ofthe Targum, that whereas thofe words, The LordPaid, do not intend a word/pa/vi, but the (table purpofe or decree of God ; as Pfal. 2. v.7. its Author hath rendred them, 11tß+cz +++ ION, The LordPaid in or by his word; that is his Wifdom, his Son, with whom and to whom he fpeaks, and concerning whom his Decree and Purpofe is here declared. It remainethonly that we confider the Obje&ionsof the Jews againft our Applica- tionof this Pfalmunto the McJah. And thefeare fummed op by Kimchi in his Expofi- tion ofthe Text. TheHereticks, faith he,expound this Pfalm of Jefar 5 and in thefrft vest they fay the Father and Sonare defigned ; and they readAdonai withCarnets under Nun, in which are the true Godit fignified by that Name. Andverfi the third, in 'p17 they read Chinch under Ain, fo making it fignifiewith thee. Andwhat is there faidof 'the beauty of Holinef?, they aferibe unto that which is from the womb. But in all Copies that arefound, from the rifing of the Sun to thegoing down of it, Chiric is with Nun in Adoni , and Pasha with Ain in Hammeka. And Gerolmus (Hierom) erred in hisTranslation. And for the errour, if the Father andSon be theGod-head, how doth onefland in need of the other ? and how can he fay unto him, Thou art a Prieft ? He is a Prieft who offers facri- fice, but God cloth not. Of the like nature are the reff of his exceptions unto the end, ofhis Notes on thatPfalm. To this Lipman addes a bitter blafphemous difcourfeabout the application of thofe words, from ïhe womb, v. 3. unto the womb of the bleffid Virgin. Anfw. Ourcaufe is not at all concerned in there miltabes, whether ofjaws or Chri- fiians. For the Jews, their chief enmity lies againfl the Deity of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and therefore whatever testimony is produceti concerning him, they prefently imagine that it is for the proof ofhisDivine Nature. This lies at the bottomof there exceptions ofKimchi. Hence he conceives, that our argument from this place lies in the word +]1N, and the pointing it with Carnets, Adunai, fo making it to be the pro- per Name of God ; when we acknowledge that it is Adoni pointed with Chiric, and lignifies myLord ; fo it is rendred by the Evangelift, Matth. zz. v. 45. fo by the LXX. and by Hierom, Dominomeo. And the argument of our Saviour lies not in the word tots, but that he being the Son of David wasalfo then the Lord of David, which he could no otherwifebe butupon theaccount ofhis DivineNature. In the words refleéted on by Kimchi, itis confeffed that there have been miftakes among(} Tranflators and Expoftors. Thofe words r111] lop are rendred by the LXX ,nerd en ñ äç,(11, and by the Vulgar from them teeum principium, with thee is the beginning; which hathmiffed many Expofitors. But Kimchi knew that Hierom had tranflated them, Populi tui duce: ffrontanei, Thy people !ball be willing leaders : giving both the fignificationsof1131], thoughone would fufhce; Thy people are, orfhallbe willing. But this pertains not to the caufeunder confederation. In like manner have thofe other- words been mifrendred by the fame Tranflation, Tilt 410ItToot) =MC; óa yaws arti inertea dyérned -re, fay the LXX; and the Vulgar, Exutero ante luciferum genui se; From the womb before the morning Star have I begotten thee; which gave occasion to many- uncouth Expoftions, in Juftin Marty, Tertullian, Epiphanius, Anilin, and others. But the words are rightly.rendred, The dew of thy birth is fromthe woitkb ofthe morning; and exprefs the rife and ftourifh- ing of the Kingdom ofthe Meffiah. Thefe things prove indeedthat it is dangerous to interpret the Scripture without heedful attending unto the Original Text ; but that the Meah is not intended in this Pfalm, they prove not. For what they farther objeil on our luppofitiou of the Divine Nature ofChrift, That therewas no need that Godfhouldpromife God hie af(ftance, it is but an open effeét oftheir ignorance or malice. Afiìtlance is not promifedthe Meffiah atGod, but as made Man for our fakes; and fo as a Prieft did he offer that Sacrifice without an in- Urea wherein both they and we muff eternally perifh. To conclude this difcourfe, we have many oftheir own Matters concurring with us in the affignation of this Pfalm unto the McJJiah ; and to that purpofe they freely exprefs themfelves, when their minds are taken off front the contideration'of the difference that they have with Chriftians. Thus the Author 4.311 rp]N lop, inhis ligns ofthe coming ofthe Mefrah: Armilusfhallfiir upallthe world, faith. he, to war againft the Mejfiah; +1+D+4 ]t0+4 N4N ricrrnJ5l1]i1S(n a +N rip" i f me, ,; whom the holy GodIOU not compelto war, but/hall only:fay unto him, Sit thou at my right hand; N n n referring 131
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=