S. Matthew alledges out of the Old Testament is from Isai vii 14. This in the Hebrew runs strictly enough according to our Translation Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel In the Septuagint it runs thus Behold a Virgin shall receive in her womb and then word for word as in the Hebrew But in the Greek of the New Testament Behold a Virgin shall have or carry in her womb which sense our Translators in the New Testament Matth. i. 23. well express shall be with child I say to conceive and to be with child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are different Phrases if not things and of more signification perhaps here than at first thought of Had our Lord according to the opinion of the old Valentinians or later Mennonites in Germany had only a Celestial body which meerly passed through the Virgin Mary not being formed of her substance she might have been said to have received it in her womb But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be with child being according to common use of the Phrase properly of Women who are truly gravid does more emphatically assert the Verity of our Lord 's Humane Nature by implying his being carried the full time in the womb and therefore that his body was nourished and consequently formed of his blessed Mothers substance which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not And it may be no wrong to the Holy Ghost to conceive he guided S. Matt. thus in Greek to word his Text rather than as the Septuagint do But besides this variation whereas the Septuagint keeping close to the Hebrew have it Thou shalt call namely Thou O Virgin shalt call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Matthew here also recedes and that from both saying They shall call And in truth in the former point he may be thought also to have a little left the Hebrew as well as Septuagint for to receive in the womb which was the Septuagints phrase more properly expresses what we mean by Conception than being with child In short his receding from the A. Septuagint in these two points is a proof of the first Proposition his receding both from Septuagint B. and from Hebrew a proof of the second The second Allegation by S. Matthew is out of Micah v. 2. which is again very well and naturally translated from the Hebrew in our Bibles thus Thou Bethlehem-Ephratha though thou be little amongst the thousands of Judah yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel The Septuagint here render it Thou Bethlehem the house of Ephratha art the least c. In the rest nearly enough to the Hebrew But S. Matthew especially in his Greek recedes from both strangely Thou O Bethlehem the land of Judah art in no wise the least amongst the Princes of Judah Matth. ii 6. Besides the Variation here is a plain contradiction to the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sept. greater difference both in Sense and Phrase cannot well be And in the latter member excepting the contradiction the variation is not much less For out of thee A. shall come forth a Ruler 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sept. Who shall feed my people B. Israel Except the proper names here is nothing alike What in the name of God did he think who asserted a perpetual consent The third Old Testament text is Hosea xi 1. which we render faithfully word for word out of the Hebrew thus Out of Egypt have I called my son But the Septuagint I have sent for his children out of Egypt S. Matth. ii 15. agrees exactly with the Hebrew A. the Septuagint being as foreign to his purpose as it is to the Original A fourth Text is out of Jerem. xxxi 15. in which again the faithfulness of our Translators to the Hebrew as well as to S. Matthew is to be commended In Ramah was there a voice heard Lamentation and weeping and great mourning Lamentation and weeping of bitterness Hebr. Rachel mourning for her children and refused Hebr. would not be comforted because they were not Matth. ii 17. He who reads the xxxi ch of Jerem. in the Septuagints Version of that Edition at least which Bishop Walton judging most correct put into our Polyglott shall find in the whole chapter nothing nearer this Text than ver 3. A voice of people crying out of Oronaim destruction and great breaking in pieces But in truth this was not designed by the Interpreters as a Translation of what is cited by S. Matthew as belonging to ch 48. 3. For here the Copy is all in confusion and this which stands in order the xxxi is indeed the xlviii And that which stands the xxxviii is legitimately the xxxi And so besides the Hebrew and our Bibles from it even the vulgar Latin and some later Editions of the Septuagint have it Now in the said xxxviii chap. v. 15. we have the text we look for which is there rendred thus Rachel all in A. weeping 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply without any adjection not as S. Matt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which perfectly answers the Hebrew and would not cease over her children because they were not A fifth Text is out of Isai xl 3. where first we find S. Matthew to follow the Septuagints Version But the reason may well be presumed to be because they here follow the Hebrew so that in CC. this text all three accord especially if we render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sense our Translators very properly as I conceive take it The little difference there is is of S. Matthew from both the Original and Septuagint for he putting the Pronoun for the Noun contracts the latter clause thus Make straight his paths instead of make straight the paths of our God which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our God very material as B. it might seem is in both but omitted by S. Matthew The sixth and seventh Texts S. Matthew produces out of the Old Testament if we wave one which is mangled by the Devil as I am apt to think it not disagreeable to do inasmuch as his authority will not much credit any Translation are such wherein Hebrew Septuagint and Evangelist CC. CC. are all at sufficient accord The places are Deut. viii 3. and vi 16. in S. Matt. iv 4 7. The Eighth is Deut. vi 13. alledged by S. Matth. iv 10 where both Hebrew and Septuagint and so indeed in parallel texts read Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God but S. Matthew glosses the word more to his purpose and receding from both saith Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God. A. The Temptation was To fall down B. and worship the Tempter v. 9. And the word Worship which is comprised in the fear of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was more pertinent to oppose to the temptation than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
concerning his son thus He shall go before him that is John the Baptist before Christ in the Spirit and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the fathers to the A. children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strictly according to the Original Not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuagint have ordered it and B. the disobedient to the wisdom of the just A free paraphrase as to this latter clause The Second Text alledged by S. Luke is in Chapter ii 23. where he tells us It is written in the Law of the Lord every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord. Now who would not expect to find this text in the Law Hebrew or Greek word for word Yet is the sense only not the words written there The first-born that openeth every matrice as the Septuagint exactly according to the Hebrew render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is commanded to be sanctified to the Lord. Exodus xiii 1. wherefore it may be justly said 't is called Holy. Let us look further and verse 12. we find that Law repeated as to Beasts thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So again verse 15. So Numbers viii 16. But the Text as S. Luke reports it and seems to say 't is written so I no where find but in him Wherefore we plainly see him use a liberty to depart from the words both of Septuagint and B. Hebrew The Third indeed is of small moment yet to be just to our proposal we must take notice of it A pair of Turtles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says S. Luke Chap. ii 24. two Turtles say both Hebrew and Septuagint In the Fourth Text there is a Concord betwixt all except only in one word What the Septuagint CC. call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plains nearer the Hebrew Isai xl 4. S. Luke stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chap. iii. 5. smooth ways I do not esteem this difference worth the accounting In the Fifth S. Luke varies a little both from the Hebrew and the Septuagints and S. Matthew's Greek The Hebrew runs thus Deut. viii 3. But upon all that proceeds out of the mouth of God shall man live The Septuagint gloss it thus upon every word that proceeds c. and S. Matthew as we have seen follows them S. Luke takes it shorter Chap. iv 4. But by every word of God. I esteem not this variation worth reckoning and therefore here again account an Accord of all C C. In the Sixth I cannot but take notice of the same Variation made by S. Luke both from the Hebrew and Septuagint which S. Matthew also made Thou shalt A. worship instead of Thou shalt fear B. Luke iv 8. I refer my Reader to the note on S. Matthew In the Seventh which was also the seventh out of S. Matthew we find S. Luke to accord with the Hebrew Septuagint and S. Matthew C C. 'T is Luke iv 12. and Deut. vi 16. The Eighth passage has in it considerable both agreement and disagreement to the Septuagint 'T is Isai lxi 1 2. Where the Septuagint render what is in the Hebrew The opening of the prison to them that are bound by recovery of sight to the blind This C. so different rendring depends upon a Criticism in the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To open properly say the Masters the eyes and ears However S. Luke follows it Chapter iv 18. But withal presently adds another rendring which plainly shews he had the Hebrew text in his eye To set at liberty or send away them that are bruised This I say is not in the Septuagint and evidently answers though it does not strictly express the Hebrew Opening of the Prison to them that are bound So that considering both he may be said here to have followed both Septuagint and Hebrew taking out of the Septuagint what was there emphatical to his purpose and yet not neglecting what in the Hebrew was not so fully translated by the Septuagint but giving a gloss B. of it according to his liberty And yet again in this text he most plainly recedes from the Septuagint in the very next clause rejecting their translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was A. not pertinent to the scope of the text and rendring it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is both pertinent to the scope and strict justice to the word The Ninth Old Testament Text which I have observed produced by S. Luke is the same with S. Mark 's first 'T is in Luke vii 27. and out of Malachi iii. 1. The two Evangelists exactly accord but both recede widely A. from the Septuagint on which B. for the present I make no other note than there I did In Luke viii 10. there is a short touch upon Isai vi 9. as indeed there was in S. Mark but it occurs again more largely in S. John we will therefore at present wave the examination thereof and for the Tenth Testimony produced out of the Old Testament by S. Luke we will take that which next follows in him Chapter x. 27. which is so much the more worthy of our notice because it is repeated by the two former Evangelists but our measure did not reach to it 'T is Deut. vi 5. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart Soul Might Hebr. Mind Soul Power Sept. Heart Soul Strength Mind Luc. Heart Soul Mind Strength Mar. Heart Soul Mind Matth. Where it is observable that our Evangelist first recedes from the Septuagint as indeed do both the other to keep with the Hebrew in the first term with all thine heart Secondly both from the Hebrew and Septuagint in B. making the Scheme consist of four terms as also doth S. Mark whereas Originally it has but three And thirdly he renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuagint Which are ample A. evidences of his not following here the Version of the Septuagint In summ Of Ten Texts taken by S. Luke out of the Old Testament we find him to recede considerably from the Septuagint 6 A. in six in three we find him to accord both with the Septuagint though not exactly and 3 C C. Hebrew In one he neither accords with Hebrew nor Septuagint as to words but only as to sense taking the liberty usual with all Writers of his own expression But besides this there are five other instances of this liberty 6 B. as to sundry members of Texts And there is only one instance and that in one clause of a Text wherein he keeps to the Septuagint apart from the Hebrew 1 C. Whence I presume both our Propositions again demonstrated CHAP. V. Texts of the Old Testament cited by S. John. THE First Chapter i. 23. Here S. John recedes both from A. the Septuagints Version which the other three Evangelists exactly followed and from them
practice as may most naturally comport with the design of the Discourse it may be hoped the pious Readers patience will not be tired in that last so short Stage And First That the word of §. III. Prophecy is sure or the Scriptures of the Old Testament a more demonstrative evidence that Christ was the Messias than was that miraculous voice from Heaven For a foundation we will take it for granted what cannot be denyed that no man of common reason who reads the Old Testament can question but that these things were explicitly and as good as in terms foretold that the Messias should be born of a Virgin that the place of his birth should be Bethlehem the time while the second Temple was standing that he should live a most holy modest and humble but yet a mean and despised life that he should make his soul an offering for sin and be cut off but not for himself that he should rise again before his body could see corruption that he should ascend into heaven and give gifts to men impower sundry sorts of people to supernatural acts by a miraculous effusion of the Holy Ghost that some time after this the City of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary should be destroyed and desolations were determined upon them the nation of the Jews should be disperst and live as vagabonds and accursed upon the face of the earth The Original and generally all Translations agree in these and such like material Prophecies of the Messias as these nor can it be pretended there are such ambiguities of Words varieties of Senses and Versions or discrepancies of Copies that all these and many other like points predicted of the Messias are uncertain Now this being admitted I say that these things being thus foretold of Jesus Christ so many hundred years before his Nativity and being also exactly verified of him in the fulness of time the Records which predict them are a greater and surer proof of his being the Son of God and Saviour of the world than the miraculous voice from heaven For 1. This Prediction was no less a §. IV. miracle than that immediate voice By a Miracle we mean a sensible effect surpassing the power of nature Now what power especially at such a vast distance of time could foretel these particularities but his by whose counsel they were effected that is they were Divine that is Supernatural and Miraculous Besides 2. These Predictions are a more publick and lasting Miracle That voice was only heard by a few Peter James and John attested but by three or four witnesses and transient This known to thousands to myriads an evident miracle in actual being to this day and likely to continue such as long as men shall live on the face of the earth or indeed to survive the world 3. In these Predictions there is no possibility of our being or of mens pleading that we can be imposed upon Collusion Fiction or Mistake might be at least pleaded in case of the immediate voice In one instance of it John xii 29. the people that heard it said it thundered others that an Angel spake to him but neither could thunder promulge nor Angel either foretel or verifie these things 1 Pet. i. 12. Angels desired to look into these things but knew them not till revealed In summ then these predictions being no less a Miracle than that immediate voice upon the Mount and as a Miracle having these three advantages of the other that they are a more publick more lasting and more unexceptionable miracle than that we may say with the Apostle in having the Scriptures of the Old Testament we have a more sure word of Prophecy than was the voice from heaven And having thus proved the §. V. certainty of the Old Testament by way of Corollary we may infer the truth of the New. For this containing partly the History of the things predicted partly a Scheme of Doctrine asserted in the Old by reason of its accord with the Old must be true if that be true At least nothing can be justly pretended against its truth except the matter of Fact should be deny'd viz. that such a person lived as Jesus of Nazareth and that he did such things and had such things done unto him as are there recorded Now as to this besides the undeniable credit of Histories there are in being a people disperst over all the world who profess such a person to have been of their Nation and that they executed him and prosecuted his followers and still execrate both as indeed we read in those books Now this matter of fact being admitted it is sure no power could effect such things for fulfilling of those Prophecies but that Divine power from whence the Prophecies first came To predict things hundreds of years before they come to pass and in pursuance of those Predictions at such distance to effect them are both of the same omnipotence Therefore the Relations contained in the New Testament are true therefore the historical Records of them must be true because containing a relation of things truly done and by the finger of God. And the Doctrinal part must be true because according with and asserted by the Old Testament which was before proved true Therefore seeing both Historical and Doctrinal parts are true the whole New Testament is a sure word We have then God be blessed both a sure word of Prophecy and a sure word of Gospel too and they do well who take heed thereto But I conceive I may upon the §. VI. Apostles authority affirm they do not so who imploy their wits and learning to traduce and overthrow the certainty of this sure word of Prophecy For if the surer be uncertain what will become of the other Nay what of all evidences of Christianity May I therefore take leave to answer the new-form'd at least new-trim'd Objections against the certainty of the Old Testament which it is therefore now more necessary to do because the books that proclaim those Objections to the world are made English and in the hands of the very common people The summ of those Objections I may reduce to three heads the Imputations of Corruption of different Readings and of the none or indeterminate Sense of the Originals Objection I. We have not the §. VII books of the Old Testament as they were written by the first Authors but certain pieces and contractions of them and those too very mutilate and corrupt Answ I crave leave to make answer for the Scriptures of the Old Testament out of those of the New. The Apostles pronounced the Scripture as extant in their days A surer word of Prophecy as we have seen given by inspiration of God able to make men wise unto Salvation perfect throughly furnished to all good works 2 Tim. iii. 15 16 17. Now we say They are the same at present as to all substantial points variations of Spelling and Orthography we are not to account for as