« PreviousContinue »
pellative, fignifying “ the Beloved ;” a usual epithet of the Mostan; as thewn in the foregoing Critique on the Sixteenth Pfalm.
Amidft “ the choice of difficulties” furnished by the various Translations of this Psalm, ancient and modern, widely differing from the present Hebrew text, and from each other ; the venerable translation of the Septuagint, being fan&tioned by so many references thereto in the New Teftament, though not to be implicitly followed throughout, yet furnishes a fafe standard of interpretation, in those passages, where a rational or confiftent sense, can scarcely otherwise be extracted.
Verf. 1. “The Lord spake unto the Regent.” For the reasons assigned before, in my ninth communication, I have de, parted from the Septuagint rendering of, '785. tw xugow Hero, Lord;" though supported by several citations of the New Testament, and by all the versions, (except the Chaldee, which seems to have read, « unto his Regent," 1785), principally, because, in the parallel paffage, Pl. 2. 4, the fame term, 'ts, is by the Septuagint rendered o xupio, followed by all the versions ; juftly considering the lod final, as paragogic or redundant : if not rather a mark of regimen understood, Adoni-Lahoh, “ Regent-Lord,” like Melchi-Sedek, “ King or Righteousness.”
Why the Septuagint adopted a different rendering in this case, (confidering the Iod final as the first personal affix) may perhaps have arisen from a wish to avoid the ambiguous repetition of ‘o xug:@:- е-то ҳvew ; occafioned by their not attaching appropriate renderings to the distin&t ele; mentary terms, nin', and '78 ; to which, as well as to the terms, Sex, mbs, and bass, the Septuagint, almost indiscriminately apply Kugto and Otos; by a most mischievous neglect of ascertaining the precise and appropriate significations, of these primitive names of the Deity, fo 'admirably and philosophically marked and distinguished in the Hebrew Scriptures, by the Inspired Penmen :-as we have seen in the foregoing communications thereon.
But why then, it may be objected, did not the Apostles and Evangelists re&tify such ambiguous and incorrect renderings ? why did they fanćtion such, by their citations ?-Does not our Lord's argument seem rather to establish the Septuagint rendering ? -" If David then, call him, (THE MESSIAH) LORD (Kuprov); How is he (THE MESSIAH)' his Son ? (via auto) where grammatical analogy, and the argument itself, seem to his,” to xugios
LORD;” as well as to yio, Son ;" both, intimating that the Messias was David's Lord, as well as David's Son. The reason may be,
Because our LORD and his Apostles, in their arguments with the Jews, frequently cite the established Translations, as more familiar, than the Hebrew Scriptures ; but without fervilely adhering, or attaching in, fallibility, thereto : Thus our Lord, in his exclamation on the Cross, though he cited the three first terms, Eli! Eli! luma-from the original of Pf. 22. 1. to ascertain his reference thereto ; concludes with the Syriac rendering of the fourth, --Sabakthani. And in like manner, though Mark adopts the Septuagint translation thereof, 'o tos Me! tog pis &c. as more familiar to those for whose use his Gospel was designed ; yet Matthew, to avoid the ambiguity of the nominative case, taken vocatively, (according to the common usage of the Septuagint) more skilfully renders, On ne! Ost pa!-thus actually exprefling the vocative case.' And so,
the Apostle to the Hebrews, in his formal citation of Pf. 110. 4, adopts the Septuagint rendering of the phrase, 18727 50, rata tativ,
66 according to the order." Heb. 5. 6, but expreffes it differently afterwards, in explanation, nata Thu mototuta, “ according to the likeness.” Heb. 7. 15.-where it
may be remarked, that the lod final in ing27 is allowed to be paragogic, by the ablest Jewish and Christian grammarians, David Kimchi, Aben Ezra, Burtorf, &c.
The expression, ox?, being folemnly appropriated in fcripture, to The LORD, or to his ORACLE, THE REGENT-LORD, is well rendered by the Septuagint, authoritatively, we, “ He fpake.”
“ Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies a fivol for thy feet.” In the Second Pfalm, the Messiah was ordained “ King;" here, the stability and duration of his dominion are illustrated. And this pariage is expressly applied by our Lord to himself, in his signal prediction, at his trial, Luk. 22. 69. Henceforward, (ano T8 vuo) jhalle The Son of Man be fitting at the right hand of the power of God.”. And as it was before stated to have commenced on the day of his resurrection, P1. 2. 7. Rom. 1. 4. Heb. 1. 3. so it is here foretold, to continue until his enemies shall be fubdued; as understood and interpreted by our great Myftagogue Paul :-[“ Christ] himself, having offered [only] one facrifice for fins, thenceforvard (a's to dimvexes) fat at the right hund of God; afterwards expecting, until his enemies be made a stool for his feet.” Heb. 10. 12. And he has more particularly unfolded this great mystery, in his sublime discourse on the Resurrection, i Cor. 15. 22, 28.—“ Even so, in Christ, ihall all be quickened; but each in his proper rank: The first fruits, CHRIST ; next, CHRIST'S [Elect, Matt. 24. 31] at his appearance; then, the end, when He thall deliver up the (fiduciary] king, dom to the GOD AND FATHER (of all] ; when He Thall have abolished every principality and every authority and power, [adverse to God and CHRIST] : For He must needs reign, “ until he have put all the enemies under his feet:” (The last enemy to be abolished is Death, Rev. 20. 14,) for [“ God] subjected all things under his feet.” (But when [Scripture] faith, that all are subjected,"—it is plainly [to be understood) with the exception of Him (Tue FATHER) who fubjected unto Him (The Son] the universe.) So, when the Universe shall be subjected to Him (THE Son], then shall also the Son himself, become subject unto Him (THE FATHER) who did subject the universe to him [THE Son]; to the end that God (The FATHER) might be THE ALL IN ALL.”
The most abftrufe and involved patlage, (which I have here humbly endeavoured to develope; from the context and parallel passages of Scripture supplying the ellipses necessary to compleat the sense and remove ambiguity) seems to intimate that the Mediatorial reign of Jesus CHRIST, is graciously designed, by a long course of preparation and discipline, çr to train many Sons to Glory,” to fit and qualify all ranks of rational creatures, who ihall be found worthy, to be admitted to the inconceivable honour and happiness of becoming the immediate subje&ts of The LORD God OMNIPOTENT, Rev. 19. 6. and so, by progresiive improvements in wisdom, and piety, and virtue, draw nearer through all eternity to the infinite Source of all goodness, the unattainable Standard of all perfection.--"0! the depth of the riches and wisdom and knouledge of Vol. III. Churchm. Mag. Oct. 1802.
God!-How unsearchable his judgments, and untraceable his ways !"
according to the eternal purpose, which He purposed in CHRIST JESÚS
From Sion : Rule thou in the midst of thine enemies."
On Sion my holy mount.”
forth the Law,
And shall rebuke many peoples.” and Pr. 2. 9.
“ Thou shalt rule them with an iron Sceptre.” Verf. 3. “ In the day of thy power, [Shall] thy people [offer]
Free-will offerings, in the boautics of Holines. As the Psalmist, in the foregoing verse, had foretold the fignal chaftifement of our Lord's foes, both Jews and Gentiles ; to here, in the spirit of prophecy, he appears to describe the devout zeal of “his (chuten, praple," of all nations and kindreds and languages, “fivui no to the House of The Lord” in Jerusalem, in " the latt days,” (or establithment of the Kingdom of God upon Earth, under his regent or vice-gerent, THE MESSIAH) and there, offering their free-will offerings, in his splendid and magnificent shrines.—This seems to be a more rational and confiftent interpretation of this most abstruse and difficult patlage, than I have hitherto seen ; by only supplying the ellip jis of the verb underttood, and suggested by the context, “jnall ofer.”—That the original term, 1.0, Thould be rendered, thy people,” (and not “ with thee,” as the Septuagint, by a different punétuation, render it) may be justified by the other versions, and most of the modern translations, and also by a similar phraseology : Judg. 5. 1 ; 2 Chron. 17. 16. where," the peopée willingly offered themselves,” or volunteered, to fight the battles of the Lord.- And “ the beauties of Holiness,” (or as it may be rendered from the Septuagint, “the beauties of the Sanctuary,") corresponds to the sense in which the same phrase, is elsewhere understood, of the splendour and magnificence of the Temple, to be built in thofe auspicious days : P1.96. 1, 10.
“ O sing unto THE LORD, a new song,
Bring an offering, and come into his Courts ::
O worl.ip The LORD, in the beauty of Holiness," &c.
“ The Kings of Tharshish and of the Ifes shall bring presents,
-Pf. 69. 29.
And we will walk in his paths.” -Ifa. 2. 2.
I surely believe—that our Brethren (the Jews] shall lie scattered throughout the Earth, from that good land, (Levit. 26. 3. Deut. 28. 36.) and Jerujalem shall be desolate, (2 Kings, 24. 14.) and the House of God in it shall be burned, and shall be. defolate for a time, (2 Kings, 25. I, 21) :~And that God will have mercy on them again, and bring them again into the land ; (Ezra, 1. 3, and 2. 1.) where they thall build a Temple, (Ezra, 6. 14.) (but not like the first) (Ezra, 3. 12. Haggai, 2. 3.) until the time of that age be fulfilled (Dan. 8. 13, and 9. 26. Matt. 24. 15) :-And afterwards they shall return from all places of their captivity (Deut. 30. 1, 3), and shall build up Jerusalem gloriously, and the House of God Jhall be built in it for ever, with a glorious building, (as the prophets have spoken, 2 Sam. 7. 13. Haggai, 2. 9. Zechar. 6. 13.) And all the Gentiles shall turn, and fear the Lord, and shall bury their idols (Pl. 96. 5, &c.); fo thall all the Gentiles praise the Lord, and his people shall confess God: And THE LORD shall exalt his people, and all those that love the Lord God in truth and justice, thall rejoice, thewing mercy unto our brethren.”—
For explanation of the prophecies refpe&ting this future Temple. alluded to by Tobit, see the foregoing Critique on Nathan's prophecy. 2 Sam. 7.
“ He (The MESSIAH) Mall build a house for my name. And in the first fruits of the Christian Church, have we not a sample of such "
free-will offerings,” and a pledge of their recurrence, in the fulness of prophetic time, at the regeneration, in the magnificent offerings of " Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh,” offered by the pious Magi out of their treasures,” to the holy Child JESUS; Matt. 2. 11. and in the voluntary offering of the first Jewish converts, who “ fold their pojeffions and lands,” for the benefit of the community, and "luid the money at the Apostle's feet?" Acts 2, 45, and 4. 34. D do
Verf. 3.- From the womb, before the morning star, (was) the dew of
thy birth.” Not being able to extract any rational or consistent sense from the various guesses on this pallage, I have closely followed the Septuagint verfion; conjecturing, but with diffidence, that it intimates the eternal generation of the Messiah ; conformably to the account of the primæral birth of Wisdom personified. Prov. 8. 22.
“ The LORD Got Me, the beginning of his way,
Before his works of old
From eternity was I ordained, &c.” And to Micah's famous prophecy, 5. 2,
.“ Whose iliings forth were from old,
From days of eternity." “ The womb,” therefore in this passage, may denote “ the womb of Time," or Eternity : as warranted by the analogy of Proverb 27. 1.
“ Boajt not thy self of to-MORROW ;
For thou knowest not what A DAY may bring forth.” And Jesus Christ ftiles himself,.“ the bright and morning Star,” of whom the planet was no more than a faint resemblance ; Rev. 22. 16. For He was
“ the day Spring from on high; who, through the tender mercy of our God, risited us," Luk. 1. 78.-" The dew of whose birth,” refreshed the Creation of old, and will again, when“ Seasons of refrejhing shall come from the Lord: Act. 3. 19,
Deut. 32. 2.
Thou art Priest for ever, according to the order of Mel
chifedek." The Apostle to the Hebrews, in his profound and elaborate argument on this paisage, has stated the great fuperiority of our LORD's priesthood, over the Levitical, as to several particulars; 1.-His divine nature ; not being a mere man, but the Son of God. 2.-More solemn consecration, by Oath. 3.-Higher rank; as invested with a royal and perpetual priesthood. 4.-A more glorious tabernacle, not an earthly but a heavenly. 5.-A more efficacious atonement, by his all-sufficient facrifice of himself; and 6.-A better covenant of spiritual blessings, by his continual mediation and interceflion for us before the throne of Grace :as Iketched in the following outline:
1. Holy Brethren, partakers of a heavenly call, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, CHRIST Jesus.”—3. 1. Or, attend to his transcendant rank, as the Shiloh, (or “ Apostle,”) of ancient prophecy, Gen. 49. 11, “ Sent” or commiflioned to teach or instruct; and Ý the High Priest,” ordained or confecrated to offer atonement for the fins of, his People. Pr. 110. 4. where the Targums, or Chaldee Para