30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary; for Nazareth thou hast found favour with God.
sage has some other meaning. But the fact is, that this encompassing in the womb being called a wonderful thing, has been referred on that very account to the miraculous conception. He supposes the woman to be the Jewish Church, which should put to rout all its powerful ene- mies. The word 220, in Hiphil or Pihil, may certainly signify to cause to turn about, i. e. to repulse. But this was by no means a thing so unusual, that it should be called a new thing in the earth; for the Church of Israel had repeatedly overpowered, or been delivered from its enemies in the most wonderful manner. The interposition of Provi- dence for this cause was by no means a new thing in the earth. The sense of repulse or put to the rout also, is very forced, and without suffi- cient authority. Blayney's Jeremiah, 4to. 1784, Oxford, p. 86, and notes 194. Calvin, an author always entitled to our most impartial at- tention, comparing the passage with Isa. xliii. 19. interprets it to sig- nify the triumph of the Jews over the Chaldeans. The woman, he inter- prets to mean, the Jews-the man, the Chaldeans-the surrounding, to the triumph of the Jewsover these, their enemies: and Luther once maintained the same opinion. This interpretation, however, is entirely overthrown by the recollection of the fact, that the Chaldeans or the Persians, or Medes, were never conquered by the Jews, who were freely released from their captivity. Not only does this fact overt row the interpretation given by this eminent man, but the word pɔ is never used figuratively. Pfeiffer adds many very curious interpretations of the passage. Vide Pfeiffer dubia vexata, p. 760. The passage is interpreted by Christian divines to refer to the miraculous conception. The woman is the mother of Christ. The man encompassed (the of Isaiah ix. 5.) is the Messiah; the encompassing is the enclosure of the promised infant cre- ated in the womb. The new thing in the earth is the creation of the infant by supernatural power, a circumstance unusual, unknown, un- thought, and unheard of before. That this is the meaning of the passage is gathered from the context, the former and latter passages connected with it referring to the Messiah. This intelligence only could give complete comfort to the pious Jews at the period when they were thus distressed. They were assured not only that they should return to their cities, but that the ancient promise should be accomplished, and the seed of the woman be born. Three arguments have been adduced by some against this mode of interpreting the passage. The first is that nap is the epithet applied only to the female sex in general, and not to any individual. More especially, that the term is by no means appli- cable to a virgin. To this it is answered, that the word is applied to an individual in the following passages—Gen. i. 27. and v. 2.; Levit. iii. 1. and 6.; and iv. 28 and 32; xxvii. 4; Num. xxxi. 15; and that it is not unusual to use the same word in opposition to 1, an individual of the other sex. And in Leviticus xii. 5. the word nap is applied to a female infant, newly born. The second argument is that the word 3 is never used to denote a newly born male infant. The Targum of Onkeles, however, on Gen. iv. 1. uses the word in this sense, and it is also so applied in Isa. ix. 5. unto us a child is born, &c. &c. 11. The third argument is, that 10 never refers to concep- tion. The word, however, signifies in general to enclose, to surround; and its use in the present instance is sufficiently enforced and applicable. Vide Pfeiffer dubia vexata, p. 760-762, and his references. (n) I will notice but one objection which has lately been again brought forward against the doctrine of the immaculate conception, as it has frequently been urged by the Socinian writers, and is so admirably answered by a gentleman to whose valuable work I am much indebted. In his calm inquiry into the Scripture doctrine of the person of Christ, Mr. Belsham observes, "If the relation given of the miraculous conception were true, it is utterly unaccountable that these extraordinary events should have been wholly omitted by Mark and John, and that there should not
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and Nazareth. riod, 4709. bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
be a single allusion to them in the New Testament, and particularly that in John's history, Jesus should be so frequently spoken of as the son of Joseph and Mary, without any comment, or the least hint that this state- ment was erroneous." This objection, says Dr. P. Smith, is plausible: but we ask a fair attention to the following considerations. The fact in question was of the most private and delicate nature possible, and, as to human attestation, it rested solely on the word of Mary herself, the person most deeply interested. Joseph's mind was satisfied with regard to her honour and veracity, by a divine vision, which, in whatever way it was evinced to him to be no delusion, was still a private and personal affair. But this was not the kind of facts to which the first teachers of Christianity were in the habit of appealing. The miracles on which they rested their claims were such as had multiplied witnesses to attest them, and generally enemies not less than friends. Here then, we see a reason why Jesus and his disciples did not refer to this circumstance, so peculiar, and necessarily private. The account in Matthew had probably been transmitted through the family of Joseph and Mary; and that in Luke, through the family or intimates of Zacharias and Elisabeth; a sup- position which furnishes a reason why the two narratives contain so little matter in common. It is objected also that this doctrine is not alluded to in the other books of the New Testament. The same reason will account for the absence of reference to this miracle in the epistolary writings of the New Testament, if that absence be admitted to the fullest extent for there is, at least, one passage which appears to carry an implication of the fact. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in explaining the symbolical representations by which it pleased the Holy Spirit, under the former dispensation, to prefigure the blessings of Christianity, seems to put the interior sanctuary, or "holy of holies," as the sign of the heavenly state; and the outer tabernacle as that of "the flesh," or human nature of the Messiah. As the Aaronical high- priest, on the great anniversary of expiation, was first to officiate in the tabernacle, offering the sacrifices and sprinkling the blood of symbolical pardon and purification, and then was to advance, through that taber- nacle, into the most holy place, the representation of the divine pre- sence; so Christ, our Great High-Priest," and "Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle,"-" entered into the sanctuary,- through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, his own blood." Now, of this tabernacle it is declared that "the Lord pitched it, and not man ;" that it was "not made with hands, that is not of this crea- tion." The expression in Scripture "not made with hands," denotes that which is effected by the immediate power of God, without the in- tervention of any inferior agency. It, therefore, in the case before us, intimates that the fleshly tabernacle of our Lord's humanity was formed, not in the ordinary way of nature, but by the immediate exercise of Om- nipotence.-Smith's Scripture Testimony to the Messiah, vol. ii. p. 17— 19. Many modern interpreters, it is true, understand "the tabernacle" in these passages as signifying the heavenly state. Yet these writers make the sanctuary" also to signify the same object; thus confound- ing two very distinct images. The propriety of the figures, the argu- ment of the connexion, and the frequent use of oкñvoc and okηvw pa to denote the human body, (2 Cor. v. 1-4. 2 Pet. i. 13, 14. and this use of at least oкKйvog is common in Greek writers: see Wetstein on 2 Cor. v. 1. and Schleusneri Lex.) satisfy me of the justness of the inter- pretation of Calvin, Grotius, James Cappel, Dr. Owen, &c. It is no objection that in Heb. x. 20. "the veil" is the symbol of the Messiah's human nature for the veil, as one of the boundaries of the tabernacle, in a natural sense belonged to it; and the passage relates to our Lord's death, so that the veil is very fitly introduced, marking the transition out of life into another state. The text was partially quoted above, for the sake of presenting alone the clauses on which the argument rests. It is proper here to insert it at length. The reader will observe the appo-
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of Nazareth.
sition of "the tabernacle" and the "blood." "But Christ, having presented himself, a High-Priest of the blessings to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands (that is, not of this creation,) and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered once (i. e. once for ever, never to be repeated,) into the sanctuary, having acquired eternal redemption." Grotius's note is so judicious and satisfactory that it deserves to be in- serted. "The design of the writer is to declare that Christ entered the highest heavens, through his sufferings and death. To keep up the comparison with the high-priest under the law, his object is to declare that Christ entered through his body and blood; for the body is very pro- perly put by metonymy for bodily sufferings; and it is common in all languages to use the term blood to denote death, as death follows upon any very copious effusion of blood. Yet he does not express the body by its proper word, but uses a symbolical description suitable for car- rying on the comparison. The Hebrews were accustomed to call the body a tabernacle: and from them the disciples of Pythagoras deduced the expression. In particular the body of Christ is called a temple, on account of the indwelling divine energy John ii. 21. Here, this body is said to be "not made with hands," and the writer explains his meaning by adding, "that is, not of this crea- tion," understanding by creation the usual order of nature; as the Jews apply the Talmudical term Beriah (creation, any thing created): for the body of Christ was conceived in a supernatural manner. "In this sense he properly employs the term not made with hands, because in the He- brew idiom any thing is said to be made with hands which is brought to pass in the ordinary course of nature. See v. 23. and Mark xiv. 58. Acts vii. 48. xvii. 24. Eph. ii. 11. The Prophets frequently give to idols the appellation made with hands, as the opposite to any thing divine." Grotii Annot. in Heb. ix. 11.-Dr. P. Smith's Messiah, vol. ii. p. 29, 30. Archbishop Magee, on the Atonement. Horsley's Tracts. Works of Bishop Bull. Scott's Christian Life. Archbishop Lawrence. Veysie. Rennell. Nares. Layman's Vindication of the Disputed Chapters of St. Matthew and St. Luke. Notes of Scott; Gill; Mant and D'Oyly. Wardlaw's Socinian Controversy. Dr. P. Smith's Ser- mon on the Atonement.
9 ON THE SALUTATION OF MARY.
The learned Joseph Mede remarks on the salutation of the angel, "Hail thou that art highly favoured," xaïpe kexapitWpèvn-that it must be rendered, not as Dr. Hammond and the Vulgate represent it, Hail thou that art full of grace, but in the same sense in which the house of Levi was highly favoured above the rest of the tribes of Israel. The word wp (holy) does not always mean "holy in life," but "holy to the Lord," which implies a relative holiness, and as the word Ton, which sometimes is considered a synonym of wp, is used in the samé twofold sense, he concludes the salutation of the angel ought so to be understood in this place. The sermon in which Mede expresses this opinion, is upon Deut. xxxiii. 8.—Let thy Urim and thy Thummim be with thy holy one. The Hebrew is be with Ton, which Junius expounds, with thy favoured one; not ἀνδρὶ ὁσίω σε, as the Septuagint, but κεχαριτωμένω σε. The word, says Lightfoot, (vol. i. p. 411, fol. edit.) is used by the Greek scholiast to express on Y, μεтà Kεxapitwμeva xapırwonon, Ps. xviii. 25. in the sense of xápis, mercy or favour, as Ephes. i. 6. ¿xapírwσev nμas. The salutation of the angel means, therefore, hail thou that art the especially elected and favoured of the Most High, to attain to that honour which the
Julian Pe- the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the Nazareth. riod, 4709. throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man!
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren.
37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Interview between Mary and Elisabeth.
39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the Hebron. gar Era, 5. hill country with haste, into a city of Juda ";
Jewish virgins, and the Jewish mothers, have so long desired- thou shalt be the mother of the Messiah. For an account of the peculiar manner in which the Jewish women desired off- spring, in the hope that they might be the mother of their pro- mised Messiah-Vide Allix's Reflections on the Books of Moses, Mede's Works, fol. edit. London, 1677. p. 181. Lightfoot, vol. i. folio edit. p. 411. See also Kuinoel and Rosenmüller in loc.
10 There is very little doubt but that Hebron was the city here spoken of. In Joshua xxi. 13. we read that Hebron, with her suburbs, was given to the children of Aaron the priest, and in ver. 11 of the same chapter, and in chap. xi. 21. it is de- scribed as a city in the hill country of Judah. After the return from the captivity of Babylon, the priests were anxious to take up their abodes in their appointed heritage. Hebron is cele- brated for many events. Here Abraham received the promise of the miraculous birth of Isaac. Here circumcision was pro- bably first instituted, (many being of opinion it was known before the time of Abraham), here Abraham had his first land, and David his first crown. John was born at Hebron, and here he first appointed, and practised as a permanent institution the ordinance of baptism (a).
The Talmudists (b) inform us of a very singular custom in the Temple service, which had a reference to Hebron. Before the morning sacrifice was offered, the President of the Temple was used to say every morning-Go and see, if it be time to kill the
40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and sa- Hebron. riod, 4709. luted Elizabeth. Before Vulgar Era, 5.
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb "; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
sacrifice. If it was time, the answer was, "it is light." Those in the court replied, "Is the light come so far, that thine eyes may see Hebron?"
How far this tradition may be received I do not venture to decide; it is certain that Hebron was always regarded with particular attention by the people of Israel, and if this tradition be correct, it must doubtless have been typical of some predicted and expected event. What place, then, in the land of Israel, could have been so appropriate for the true light first to dawn before the perfect sacrifice could be offered, as the city of He- bron. Here John the Baptist was born-and here the rays of truth first shone; when, through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, the appointed Saviour was hailed for the first time near this place, as the Lamb of God, the true Sacrifice, who should take away the sins of the world.
Can these remarkable and wonderful events be regarded only as coincidences? To me they appear to point out the beautiful connexion and harmony in minute points of the two dispensations, and to prove that nothing has come to pass, but what was ordained of old.
If the account of Josephus (Bell. Jud. lib. 5. c. 7.) may be depended upon, Hebron was not only celebrated for the great events which had there taken place, but was renowned for its antiquity, and considered of more ancient date than Memphis, in Egypt. Jerome and Eusebius likewise mention that there still remained at Mamre, near Hebron, the oak under which Abraham entertained his angelic visitors; and that the surrounding Gentiles held it in great veneration.
(a) See Witsius de Vitâ Johan. Bapt. Misc. Sacra, vol. ii. P: 495. (b) Lightfoot's Chorographical Century-Works, folio, vol. ii. p. 46.
11 The native Jew who reads in St. Luke's Gospel this expression, would be reminded of a tradition of their fathers, that when the Israelites came to the red sea the children in the womb leaped for joy.
imo etiam ואפילו ואיכון עוברין במעי אמהון הוו, ומשבחן לל"בה:
embryones, qui in utero matris erant, viderunt id, et Deum S. B. celebrarunt. Possibly it was in allusion to this tra- dition that the phrase is here used. Elizabeth may be sup- posed to express the greatness of her joy at the sight of her cousin, which so agitated her as to produce this effect. Eli- zabeth compared her happiness, in beholding the mother of the expected Messiah, to that of her countrymen when they saw before them, for the first time, the earnest of their long wished for deliverance from Egypt. Fol. 25. col. 99. apud Zohar Exod. fol. 32. col. 91. apud Schoetgen. Hor. Heb. vol. i. p. 257.
« PreviousContinue » |